On Mon, 01 Dec 2014 17:28:38 +
ubuntu-devel-discuss-requ...@lists.ubuntu.com wrote:
> There
> is no requirement in Debian to use systemd as the init system.
I may be out of date as I have lost interest in Debian but believe the
concerning difference of devuan is that Debian has m
On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Diego Germán Gonzalez
wrote:
> El 02/12/14 a las 08:12, Tom H escibió:
>>
>> Why would Ubuntu give its users a choice of init now when it hasn't in the
>> past?
>
> Why use Unity when we always use Gnome?
> Why use LibreOffice when we always use OpenOffice?
> Why us
On 12/02/2014 04:24 AM, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Stephen P. Villano [2014-12-02 5:11 -0500]:
>> Personally, I prefer SElinux to polkit
>
> You know that these two have pretty much nothing in common, right?
> Perhaps you meant "SELinux over AppArmor"?
>
> Indeed that's another example where Debian of
On 02.12.2014 11:11, Stephen P. Villano wrote:
> Personally, I prefer SElinux to polkit, but such isn't part of the
Dont they play in entirely different areas ?
I just started to care about polkit, when began doing weird things
and causing network-manager to break (more precise: the gnome
fronte
Some time ago, I observed even major ISPs being blacklisted
in some spamfilter appliance network (just forgot its name ;-o),
where I'm *pretty* sure that they're not spamming (I know these
guys personally, and they're quite professional, compared to
other companies of this size) - and there was n
On 02.12.2014 11:24, Martin Pitt wrote:
Hi folks,
> Indeed that's another example where Debian offers a choice but Ubuntu
> doesn't -- we examine the alternatives, pick one, and support nothing
> else. (cf. combinatorial explosion and efficient maintenance and
> support).
by the way: could anybo
Heya,
On 2 December 2014 at 11:57, Diego Germán Gonzalez
wrote:
> El 02/12/14 a las 08:12, Tom H escibió:
>>
>> Why would Ubuntu give its users a choice of init now when it hasn't in the
>> past?
>>
>> --
>
> Why use Unity when we always use Gnome?
> Why use LibreOffice when we always use OpenOff
y ?
>>> Yes, it will be. As Scott and others have already pointed out, Ubuntu
>>> never offered a choice of init systems, and doesn't plan on doing so.
>> Okay, thanks for the clear statement.
>>
>> So we don't have to bother w/ Ubuntu anymore at all
El 02/12/14 a las 08:12, Tom H escibió:
Why would Ubuntu give its users a choice of init now when it hasn't in the past?
--
Why use Unity when we always use Gnome?
Why use LibreOffice when we always use OpenOffice?
Why use Mir when we always use Xorg and all the rest will use Wayland?
Again, I
On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 1:55 AM, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
wrote:
> On 01.12.2014 19:15, Tom H wrote:
>>
>> Especially after deciding a few months ago to switch to systemd!
>
> By the way: is it then be mandatory ?
Why would Ubuntu give its users a choice of init now when it hasn't in the p
On 12/2/14 5:24 AM, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Stephen P. Villano [2014-12-02 5:11 -0500]:
>> Personally, I prefer SElinux to polkit
> You know that these two have pretty much nothing in common, right?
> Perhaps you meant "SELinux over AppArmor"?
>
> Indeed that's another example where Debian offers a
On 12/2/14 5:26 AM, Mehboob Nazim wrote:
> dear all,
>
>
> i have a marketing server for office use and based linux.Now i need to
> change the smtp ip address for a time being because last ip has been
> blacklisted..
>
>
> kindly share me idea..
>
>
>
Erm, first, find out *why* your server was
already pointed out, Ubuntu
> >> never offered a choice of init systems, and doesn't plan on doing so.
> > Okay, thanks for the clear statement.
> >
> > So we don't have to bother w/ Ubuntu anymore at all (besides migrating
> > away), we can concentrate on
Stephen P. Villano [2014-12-02 5:11 -0500]:
> Personally, I prefer SElinux to polkit
You know that these two have pretty much nothing in common, right?
Perhaps you meant "SELinux over AppArmor"?
Indeed that's another example where Debian offers a choice but Ubuntu
doesn't -- we examine the alter
buntu
>> never offered a choice of init systems, and doesn't plan on doing so.
> Okay, thanks for the clear statement.
>
> So we don't have to bother w/ Ubuntu anymore at all (besides migrating
> away), we can concentrate on Devuan. (eg. getting rid of polkit etc).
> T
plan on doing so.
Okay, thanks for the clear statement.
So we don't have to bother w/ Ubuntu anymore at all (besides migrating
away), we can concentrate on Devuan. (eg. getting rid of polkit etc).
The only blocker right now is Zimbra, which is currently not packaged
for Debian yet - but as we&#
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult [2014-12-02 7:55 +0100]:
> By the way: is it then be mandatory ?
Yes, it will be. As Scott and others have already pointed out, Ubuntu
never offered a choice of init systems, and doesn't plan on doing so.
This just introduces complexity, combinatorial testing expl
in other places (eg. get rid of cups stuff).
In case of Ubuntu will force me to use systemd, I wont invest any
resources here (also never again rollout Ubuntu for my customers),
instead fully concentrate on Devuan.
cu
--
Enrico Weigelt,
metux IT consulting
+49-151-27565287
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss
It's fairly impossible, at this point in time, to have a discuss about
Devuan without it also being a discussion about systemd, that is the
raison d'etat for it's existence. If they can get it off the ground and
produce a stable, sustainable distribution, then that might change
It's in its initial phases; we're capable of many options; we've forked
many things in the past. It's not about a holy war between versions, it's
not about a dislike of a topic, it's simply something that can either be
discussed or ignored. One can either contribute their opinion or leave it
be, le
so many negative reactions.
> It is not the first time that Ubuntu takes a fork (libreoffice, libav)
> and I think that negative reactions as exaggerated discourage
> participation of users
The only reason Devuan exists is some people "don't like" for a large value of
&quo
El 01/12/14 a las 15:45, Michael Hall escibió:
Please do keep an eye on Devuan's development, and participate in it if
you are interested in the direction they are taking. But I think we can
all agree that it is*far* too early to start thinking about rebase-ing
off of it.
I only seek to comment
On 12/01/2014 09:22 AM, Diego Germán Gonzalez wrote:
> I just learned of the launch of Devuan
> https://devuan.org/
> A fork of Debian which eliminates the requirement to use systemd, and
> promises to build a less bureaucratic and more friendly community
> towards the derived dist
your high horse.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: ubuntu-devel-discuss-boun...@lists.ubuntu.com
> [mailto:ubuntu-devel-discuss-boun...@lists.ubuntu.com] On Behalf Of Scott
> Kitterman
> Sent: 01 December 2014 18:03
> To: ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
> Subject: R
On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Diego Germán Gonzalez
wrote:
>
> I just learned of the launch of Devuan
> https://devuan.org/
> A fork of Debian which eliminates the requirement to use systemd, and
> promises to build a less bureaucratic and more friendly community towards
> t
oun...@lists.ubuntu.com] On Behalf Of Scott
> Kitterman
> Sent: 01 December 2014 18:03
> To: ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
> Subject: Re: Devuan
>
> As I explained, it's not relevant. I get you think it is. I disagree. The
> mail (since you care to debate it) is
off-topic just because you don't like the idea, so
> > please, get off your high horse.
>
> A distro is much more than a bit of code. Devuan uses systemD it as an
> excuse to create a more open, less bureaucratic and more friendly to the
> derivative distrio community.
> Anyway D
future - that is completely relevant and completely
acceptable content to post - you have zero right to come down on him and
accuse him of being off-topic just because you don't like the idea, so
please, get off your high horse.
A distro is much more than a bit of code. Devuan uses systemD it
-boun...@lists.ubuntu.com] On Behalf Of Scott
Kitterman
Sent: 01 December 2014 18:03
To: ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Subject: Re: Devuan
As I explained, it's not relevant. I get you think it is. I disagree. The
mail (since you care to debate it) is also based on a false premise. There
is no r
Message-
> From: ubuntu-devel-discuss-boun...@lists.ubuntu.com
> [mailto:ubuntu-devel-discuss-boun...@lists.ubuntu.com] On Behalf Of Scott
> Kitterman
> Sent: 01 December 2014 17:42
> To: ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
> Subject: Re: Devuan
>
> On Monday, December 01,
Ubuntu in
the future.
-Original Message-
From: ubuntu-devel-discuss-boun...@lists.ubuntu.com
[mailto:ubuntu-devel-discuss-boun...@lists.ubuntu.com] On Behalf Of Scott
Kitterman
Sent: 01 December 2014 17:42
To: ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Subject: Re: Devuan
On Monday, Decembe
On Monday, December 01, 2014 11:22:22 AM Diego Germán Gonzalez wrote:
> I just learned of the launch of Devuan
> https://devuan.org/
> A fork of Debian which eliminates the requirement to use systemd, and
> promises to build a less bureaucratic and more friendly community
> towa
I just learned of the launch of Devuan
https://devuan.org/
A fork of Debian which eliminates the requirement to use systemd, and
promises to build a less bureaucratic and more friendly community
towards the derived distros
Will have to see how the project evolves, but if they do not be a bad
33 matches
Mail list logo
