Re: Standard description file about maintainer groups

[Ola Lundqvist]

Hello

On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 07:45:31AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> * Sean Perry [Sun, 27 Mar 2005 18:36:49 -0800]:
> 
> > Source: mysource
> > Maintainer: Bob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Maintainers: Bob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, George <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> > I left the Maintainer in place to allow for some backwards 
> > compatibility. This could be the 'captain' of the project.
> 
>   Or a list. See the Maintainer field of e.g. lintian, exim4, kde.
>   And wrt 'Maintainers', there is 'Uploaders' already.

A common way is to list the contact address for the group
as maintainer and each person responsible for uploads in Uploaders.
You miss non official Debian developers this way though.

Regards,

// Ola

> -- 
> Adeodato Simó
> EM: asp16 [ykwim] alu.ua.es | PK: DA6AE621
> Listening to: Paco de Lucía y Ricardo Modrego - El emigrante
>  
> Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it.
> 
> 
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 

-- 
 - Ola Lundqvist ---
/  [EMAIL PROTECTED] Annebergsslingan 37  \
|  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 654 65 KARLSTAD  |
|  +46 (0)54-10 14 30  +46 (0)70-332 1551   |
|  http://www.opal.dhs.org UIN/icq: 4912500 |
\  gpg/f.p.: 7090 A92B 18FE 7994 0C36  4FE4 18A1 B1CF 0FE5 3DD9 /
 ---


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Standard description file about maintainer groups

[David Schmitt]

On Monday 28 March 2005 00:04, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> I suggest debian/README.Debian.Maintainers as the filename.

Hmm .. Following from README to README.Debian, wouldn't AUTHORS.Debian make 
more sense?

Also, often this list is already present in debian/copyright ("packaged 
by ...")


Regards, David
-- 
- hallo... wie gehts heute?
- *hust* gut *rotz* *keuch*
- gott sei dank kommunizieren wir über ein septisches medium ;)
 -- Matthias Leeb, Uni f. angewandte Kunst, 2005-02-15

Re: How to detect which user is connected to $DISPLAY

[David Weinehall]

On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 12:01:05AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 20:23:29 +0200, Michelle Konzack
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Am 2005-03-27 20:12:37, schrieb Marc Haber:
> >> You should ask user-related questions on a user-related mailing list.
> >
> >I have asked here because I have already
> >gotten unuseful $USER answers.
> >
> >I need a qualified REAL solution.
> 
> Hire a consultant. -devel is not the second-level-support hotline.

A, come off it, this question is a hell lot more on-topic for this
list than 95% of all flame-wars here...


Regards: David Weinehall
-- 
 /) David Weinehall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> /) Rime on my window   (\
//  ~   //  Diamond-white roses of fire //
\)  http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/(/   Beautiful hoar-frost   (/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Standard description file about maintainer groups

[George Danchev]

On Monday 28 March 2005 12:30, David Schmitt wrote:
> On Monday 28 March 2005 00:04, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > I suggest debian/README.Debian.Maintainers as the filename.
>
> Hmm .. Following from README to README.Debian, wouldn't AUTHORS.Debian make
> more sense?
>
> Also, often this list is already present in debian/copyright ("packaged
> by ...")

Any worries having copyright as follow:


This package was originally debianized by First Last  on


Group-maintained by:

name1 
...
nameN 

It was downloaded from:
ftp/http/cvs/svn/arch url's follow...

Upstream Author: name 

Copyright:
follows

-- 
pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 
fingerprint1AE7 7C66 0A26 5BFF DF22 5D55 1C57 0C89 0E4B D0AB 


pgpdw08us4umY.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Policy for devfs support

[Roger Leigh]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:

> On Mar 26, Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I'm asking because of obstruction (from upstream) regarding the
>> application of a simple patch to allow yaboot to support it:
>> 
>> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=300950
> The yaboot maintainer has been resisting for years all kinds of sensible
> changes (like #233810), so I'm not really surprised.

Is there anything that could be done about this?  I don't think that
it's acceptable for the package maintainer to ignore the report for 13
months, even if they dislike it.


Regards,
Roger

- -- 
Roger Leigh
Printing on GNU/Linux?  http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net/
Debian GNU/Linuxhttp://www.debian.org/
GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848.  Please sign and encrypt your mail.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 

iD8DBQFCR9o4VcFcaSW/uEgRArrVAJ9xsxLVdpk74g9LsXQMTGH634n3QgCfW3W6
w1txn5QDAi0u+ysrvP7x3hs=
=Qpne
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: How to detect which user is connected to $DISPLAY

[Michelle Konzack]

Am 2005-03-27 14:23:16, schrieb Sean Perry:

> Something akin to d-bus is one solution. You asked earlier how this 
> works. The idea is that either the XDM (or workalike) or the user's 
> .xinitrc or perhaps even the window manager / session manager would 
> start a program which would announce their presence to the system. Not 
> unlike how IM clients work and with a similar purpose. A program can 
> then query ans ask "who has open X sessions?", "who is on display 
> $FOO?", etc.

I use $USER independant /etc/X11/xsession.d/ which works fine for
"xdm" and "wdm" but is there something similar for "kdm" and "gdm" ?

The Enterprise for which I develop the Tools are using wdm + fvwm
and there is no problem at all.  But I am dubious if they use KDE
or GNOME it may not more work.

Maybe I shoult avoid the use of gdm/kdm (if possibel, because I do
not use and know it).

> Reading the w or who output is pretty simple and most people will be 
> moving up to sarge soon, I do not know too many people really using 
> Woody any more.

Not privatly but in enterprises...
I run some Backports and it works fine.

With SARGE we had problems to install it in a minimum.

Greetings
Michelle

-- 
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ 
Michelle Konzack   Apt. 917  ICQ #328449886
   50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi
0033/3/8845235667100 Strasbourg/France   IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)


signature.pgp
Description: Digital signature

Re: How to define a release architecture

[Anthony DeRobertis]

Steve Langasek wrote:
One of the delays affecting getting lully.d.o back on line, AIUI, was a dead
power supply that was non-trivial to replace.  This is a case of scarce
hardware impacting a port even *before* it has ceased to become available
for sale.
Well, N+1 redundancy is already required. Maybe a requirement for N+2 or 
more for architectures where replacement parts are hard to find?

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Standard description file about maintainer groups

[Adeodato Simó]

* Ola Lundqvist [Mon, 28 Mar 2005 10:37:33 +0200]:

> A common way is to list the contact address for the group
> as maintainer and each person responsible for uploads in Uploaders.
> You miss non official Debian developers this way though.

  Nothing mandates that the Uploaders field is DD-only, AFAICT. And I
  believe that Uploaders really is meant to mean Co-Maintainers.

-- 
Adeodato Simó
EM: asp16 [ykwim] alu.ua.es | PK: DA6AE621
 
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve
immortality throguh not dying.
-- Woody Allen


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Policy for devfs support

[Marco d'Itri]

On Mar 28, Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> > The yaboot maintainer has been resisting for years all kinds of sensible
> > changes (like #233810), so I'm not really surprised.
> Is there anything that could be done about this?  I don't think that
> it's acceptable for the package maintainer to ignore the report for 13
> months, even if they dislike it.
Sure, somebody interested could fork the package.

-- 
ciao,
Marco


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Policy for devfs support

[Jeroen van Wolffelaar]

On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 11:19:43AM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> 
> > On Mar 26, Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> I'm asking because of obstruction (from upstream) regarding the
> >> application of a simple patch to allow yaboot to support it:
> >> 
> >> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=300950
> > The yaboot maintainer has been resisting for years all kinds of sensible
> > changes (like #233810), so I'm not really surprised.
> 
> Is there anything that could be done about this?  I don't think that
> it's acceptable for the package maintainer to ignore the report for 13
> months, even if they dislike it.

Regarding Debian maintainer, a maintainer should not resist NMU's then
(note one cannot force someone to take any action, just request to not
actively work against). If the maintainer indeed is opposed to changes,
and you think they should be made, the tecinical committee should be
asked to rule.

Regarding upstream, everything that happens to the package is the
upstream's prerogative, and you'll need to fork if you disagree and
think people are better off with an alternative that *has* your wished
changes.

Note, I didn't look at the requests at hand, but for this type of issues
(people working against certain changes), there are always methods in
place to resolve that kind of disputes.

--Jeroen

-- 
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357)
http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: How to define a release architecture

[Wouter Verhelst]

On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 12:38:05AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 01:01:24PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 05:28:51PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > This adds up to a lot of effort for a dead-end architecture.  Do
> > > you believe that such ports are going to command enough interest
> > > to be able to keep up with Debian's stable support requirements
> > > for more than 2 1/2 years (18mo.  release cycle + 1 year support
> > > for oldstable) after being discontinued as a product?
> 
> > I'm assuming you're talking about m68k here. If not, please correct me.
> 
> Hmm, not particularly.  I don't really have any preconception/prejudice that
> the processors need to be in ongoing use in new *desktop* products; Debian
> obviously runs the gamut from mainframe to server/desktop to embedded.
> 
> If the m68k architecture is still being used in new systems capable of
> running Debian, then I think this requirement is met.

That is the case. The BVM VME modules are capable of running Debian (and
did so with woody); the q60 machines should be, too (although they are
not supported with bootfloppies and not very well tested with d-i)

> > m68k has been EOLed in desktop hosts for about 10 years now. There are
> > still people interested in it, who install Linux on their old hardware
> > for the first time, even today.
> 
> > I think that pretty much translates to an answer of 'yes' to the above
> > question.
> 
> Possibly, but I'm not convinced that potential userbase size ever guarantees
> a viable port just by numbers alone.  I don't know if the liveliness of the
> m68k community is related to the continued availability of new m68k
> processors (which are still available, based on the general response I've
> gotten that this requirement doesn't affect any of our current ports?  Even
> though I don't know where to find a new m68k myself).

http://www.bvm.co.uk/vmeprods.html
http://www.q40.de/

These are systems that can be bought new today, and are supported under
Debian. The VME requires one to have a VME case, but it should (in
theory) work in a new VME case as well (the VME technology is a single
board computer bus architecture that is an industry standard, somewhat
comparable in function to the blade system).

http://www.czuba-tech.com/CT60/english/welcome.htm

for the CT60 and CT63, which are expansion boards for the Atari Falcon.
The CT60 was designed only one or two years ago, while the CT63 is even
more recent. They both allow one to upgrade a Falcon to a 68060-based
system that would run at 100Mhz. There are some Debian/m68k porters that
own one of the CT60 boards, and we're working on getting them supported.

Since the board requires one to already own an Atari Falcon, however,
I'm not sure whether this satisfies your requirement; but it sure does
show that the m68k community is far from dead (else there wouldn't be
any interest in such a board design, let alone two of them).

> I would be inclined to suspect that it is. 
[related to availability of the processor]

So would I; but as it is still available (and still quite often used in
embedded situations), I would think that this is not currently a
problem.

> > If the DSA people do not have enough time to spend in keeping stable
> > security buildds for old architectures running, they are welcome to hand
> > over buildd maintenance to other people; there are enough experienced
> > people to take over, if required.
> 
> If they choose to do so, that's fine with me; however, particularly for
> buildds for stable-security, I think it's important that the machines be
> under the de facto authority of DSA

They already are. If a machine would not satisfy a requirement set by
DSA, they can remove that machine's SSH key from the wanna-build
authorized_keys file.

> -- even though they might delegate a particular machine's
> administration to someone who doesn't have authority over Debian
> machines in general.

So what would be the difference with today?

> > In the specific case of OpenOffice.org, the point is moot.
> > OpenOffice.org requires some assembly glue, so needs to be ported to
> > every architecture it runs on; currently, there are OpenOffice.org
> > packages for i386, powerpc, sparc, and s390; none for any of the slower
> > architectures, and doing them wouldn't be possible without someone
> > spending their time on it anyway.
> 
> The OOo example was not mine;

I know, but I found it necessary to explain this bit.

[...]
> > > The porters don't control the size of the largest packages in the archive;
> > > and package sizes do continue to go up, just like everything else.
> 
> > Not just that; package build times for equally-sized packages continue
> > to go up as well, because of increased optimisation.
> 
> Indeed.  So eventually, all architectures will be able to run the code, but
> none will be able to build it. ;)

Heh :)

-- 
 EARTH
 smog  |   bricks
 AIR  --  mud  -- FIRE
so

Re: Should Debian use lsb init-functions?

[Wouter Verhelst]

On Sun, Mar 27, 2005 at 01:46:53AM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> - there is no logging of init scripts (#169600) startup, so it's difficult 
> to determine (post-boot) if all the system's elements started up correctly.

For the record, it is not true that there is no logging of initscripts.
The logging is perhaps not enabled by default and it is perhaps not
detailed to the extent as suggested in the bugreport, but by running

echo 'BOOTLOGD_ENABLE=Yes' > /etc/default/bootlogd

one can enable initscript logging to /var/log/boot, which will show
everything that was sent to the console during bootup (excluding kernel
messages).

-- 
 EARTH
 smog  |   bricks
 AIR  --  mud  -- FIRE
soda water |   tequila
 WATER
 -- with thanks to fortune


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#301700: ITP: update-manager -- a GNOME application that manages apt updates

[Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña]

On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 10:08:51AM -0300, Andre Filipe de Assuncao e Brito 
wrote:
> >Sorry, 404 here.
> Yes. Recently, Michiel has changed his website, and the update-manager 
> website has go down, but I talk to him and he'll put on the website 
> more quickly possible.

Digging through Google I've found 
http://higgs.djpig.de/ubuntu/www/hoary/gnome/update-notifier
and 
https://oops.kerneljanitors.org/repos/upgrade-notifier/

This looks like it needs to be run as root, does it?

> Yes, it's similar. Take a look at ubuntu people. They have nice 
> screenshots!

I've been unable to find decent screenshots, but if it needs to run as root 
I'd rather take apt-watch.

Regards

Javier


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Bug#301700: ITP: update-manager -- a GNOME application that manages apt updates

[Matt Zimmerman]

On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 05:41:40PM +0200, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 10:08:51AM -0300, Andre Filipe de Assuncao e Brito 
> wrote:
> > >Sorry, 404 here.
> > Yes. Recently, Michiel has changed his website, and the update-manager 
> > website has go down, but I talk to him and he'll put on the website 
> > more quickly possible.
> 
> Digging through Google I've found 
> http://higgs.djpig.de/ubuntu/www/hoary/gnome/update-notifier
> and 
> https://oops.kerneljanitors.org/repos/upgrade-notifier/
> 
> This looks like it needs to be run as root, does it?

No, it doesn't.

-- 
 - mdz


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#301700: ITP: update-manager -- a GNOME application that manages apt updates

[Steve Greenland]

On 27-Mar-05, 14:01 (CST), Andre Filipe de Assuncao e Brito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote: 
>   Description : GNOME application that manages apt updates
> 
> This is the GNOME apt update manager. It checks for updates and 
> lets the user choose which to install.

apt-cache show apt-watch

Steve
-- 
Steve Greenland
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
world.   -- seen on the net


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels

[Thomas Bushnell BSG]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:

> (I already asked you to please stop Cc'ing me on every reply, what else
> do I need to do?)

Fix Debian's gnus. :)

> On Mar 27, Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > > We are unable to fix security bugs in hardware with non-modifiable
> > > firmware and modifiable but permanently stored firmware too. Should we
> > > drop support for these devices too?
> > In that case, we are not responsible for shipping them the buggy
> > software in the first place.

> This looks like a very weak argument. Considering that users need anyway
> the drivers for these devices (it's not like there is any choice for
> e.g. DVB receivers and USB DSL modems), I think it's quite obvious that
> they prefer to have them in Debian.

I don't think it's the least bit obvious.

But your argument here is simply "users want it, so we should ship
it." 

That doesn't get at the original question:

What is the reduced set of freedoms you want?

Why is this class of software so different from every other that we
should accept this reduced set of freedoms?

Thomas


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Should Debian use lsb init-functions?

[Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña]

On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 02:24:03PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2005 at 01:46:53AM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña 
> wrote:
> > - there is no logging of init scripts (#169600) startup, so it's difficult 
> > to determine (post-boot) if all the system's elements started up correctly.
> 
> For the record, it is not true that there is no logging of initscripts.
> The logging is perhaps not enabled by default and it is perhaps not
> detailed to the extent as suggested in the bugreport, but by running
(...)

Sorry, I was not aware of this. Maybe the d-i team could use it (at least 
in the first system bootup after a system is installed)...

Thanks for pointing it out.

Regards

Javier


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Should Debian use lsb init-functions?

[Jeroen van Wolffelaar]

On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 02:24:03PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> For the record, it is not true that there is no logging of initscripts.
> The logging is perhaps not enabled by default and it is perhaps not
> detailed to the extent as suggested in the bugreport, but by running
> 
> echo 'BOOTLOGD_ENABLE=Yes' > /etc/default/bootlogd
> 
> one can enable initscript logging to /var/log/boot, which will show
> everything that was sent to the console during bootup (excluding kernel
> messages).

*blink*, wow... why isn't this like on by default, and the package in
question installed by default?

I had no clue this option existed...

--Jeroen

-- 
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357)
http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

I have to hear from you soon, I want to be with you right now..,,.saw

[Christiana Orozco]

Please talk to me soon. I wish I was with you right now. I can't get you and 
how great we would be together out of my mind. I'm on my webcam right now if u 
go to my site below we can talk on it right now. I can't wait to hear from you.

http://mjkt.greatmallusion.com/cs3/

___
Bernadette fountainhead justice. Judy desideratum cow runty upstream 
concessionaire fluffy.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#301892: ITP: cuetools -- tools for manipulating CUE/TOC files

[Joshua Kwan]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Joshua Kwan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

* Package name: cuetools
  Version : 1.3
  Upstream Author : Svend Sorenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://developer.berlios.de/projects/cuetools/
* License : GPL
  Description : tools for manipulating CUE/TOC files

cuetools is a set of programs that are useful for manipulating CUE sheet
(cue) files and Table of Contents (toc) files. The package includes these
utilities:

   - cueconvert: convert between CUE and TOC formats
   - cuebreakpoints: print the breakpoints from a CUE or TOC file
   - cueprint: print disc and track information for a CUE or TOC file

Probably the most popular use is to split a large audio file into many
small files according to a CUE or TOC, for example:

cuebreakpoints disc.cue | shntool split disc.wav

I've prepared packages at http://people.debian.org/~joshk/cuetools/.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (499, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.11ac2
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) (ignored: LC_ALL 
set to en_US.UTF-8)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Should Debian use lsb init-functions?

[Marco d'Itri]

On Mar 29, Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> > one can enable initscript logging to /var/log/boot, which will show
> > everything that was sent to the console during bootup (excluding kernel
> > messages).
> *blink*, wow... why isn't this like on by default, and the package in
> question installed by default?
Because it does not work on all systems, and when it does it has annoying
bugs (many of them documented in the BTS).
(E.g. it will not work on udev systems without some hacking.)

-- 
ciao,
Marco


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Should Debian use lsb init-functions?

[Alban Browaeys]

Le Tue, 29 Mar 2005 01:09:55 +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar a écrit :

> On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 02:24:03PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>> For the record, it is not true that there is no logging of initscripts.
>> The logging is perhaps not enabled by default and it is perhaps not
>> detailed to the extent as suggested in the bugreport, but by running
>> 
>> echo 'BOOTLOGD_ENABLE=Yes' > /etc/default/bootlogd
>> 
>> one can enable initscript logging to /var/log/boot, which will show
>> everything that was sent to the console during bootup (excluding kernel
>> messages).
> 
> *blink*, wow... why isn't this like on by default, and the package in
> question installed by default?

well because if you boot in single user mode it will log all your root
session for example. There is not much to do about that (except spending
hours adding hack to a broken hack).




-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Should Debian use lsb init-functions?

[Ron Johnson]

On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 06:31 +0200, Alban Browaeys wrote:
> Le Tue, 29 Mar 2005 01:09:55 +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar a écrit :
> 
> > On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 02:24:03PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> >> For the record, it is not true that there is no logging of initscripts.
> >> The logging is perhaps not enabled by default and it is perhaps not
> >> detailed to the extent as suggested in the bugreport, but by running
> >> 
> >> echo 'BOOTLOGD_ENABLE=Yes' > /etc/default/bootlogd
> >> 
> >> one can enable initscript logging to /var/log/boot, which will show
> >> everything that was sent to the console during bootup (excluding kernel
> >> messages).
> > 
> > *blink*, wow... why isn't this like on by default, and the package in
> > question installed by default?
> 
> well because if you boot in single user mode it will log all your root
> session for example.

Sounds like a good thing to me!

>  There is not much to do about that (except spending
> hours adding hack to a broken hack).

-- 
-
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson, LA USA
PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail.

"Though force can protect in emergency, only justice, fairness,
consideration and cooperation can finally lead men to the dawn of
eternal peace."
Dwight D Eisenhower



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part