On 08/17/2012 04:37 PM, Justin Strickland wrote:
If I recall correctly I don't believe you would have to modify any program to
work with systemd, the only thing you'd have to do is create a unit for it.
(Though I could be wrong please correct me if I'm wrong.)_
It is better if programs are w
+According to Leon Feng:
Systemd support shortform service name now. See the wiki page:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Systemd#Using_Units
For now, this only seems to work for starting, stopping and reloading
services. Unfortunately it doesn't yet seem to work for enabling or
disabling
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 11:09:06AM -0700, Ben Booth wrote:
> remove the /usr/bin/python symlink and replace with this shell script:
>
> #!/usr/bin/env bash
> exec /usr/bin/"${PYTHON:-python3}" "$@"
Bravo! I approve.
This solution is 0.99 times as good as the option to just not
have Python 3
Hello,
I am having trouble with time on a machine when I boot with systemd. The clock
is ahead of actual time by the value of time zone offset.
Funny thing is when I boot with initscripts, time is reported correctly.
I have this problem on one machine but other machine works correctly. The only
2012/8/18 Kyle :
> I made the move to systemd on my flash drive install 2 days ago, and I have
> to say I am impressed. The only extra thing I needed to do was to write a
> unit file for espeakup, since there isn't yet a unit in the package or in
> systemd-arch-units. Writing the new .service file
I made the move to systemd on my flash drive install 2 days ago, and I
have to say I am impressed. The only extra thing I needed to do was to
write a unit file for espeakup, since there isn't yet a unit in the
package or in systemd-arch-units. Writing the new .service file was
extremely quick a
> > > Not because
> > > it is good software but because the other adequate software that this
> > > community depends on is going to require it.
> >
> > Let me know so I'm aware what the software you have in mind is if it
> > hasn't been mentioned please.
> >
> > Debian and Ubuntu plus the
> If their are 1000 users, for example.
> This is a split: 100 use Arch init script, 200 use Fedora init script,
> 300 use Debian init script, 400 use Megeia init script
> This is a unify: 980 use Systemd and the same service files, 20% Arch
> users chose to stay with initscripts.
>
> You can see
> https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Systemd#Arch_integration
> "Warning: /usr must be mounted and available at bootup (this is not
> particular to systemd). If your /usr is on a separate partition, you
> will need to make accommodations to mount it from the initramfs and
> unmount it from a piv
On 2012-08-15 17:11, Thomas Bächler wrote:
>
> So, with initscripts, we mount all the API file systems manually. When
> you put them in fstab as well, things fail. But when you want special
> options for those file systems, you won't get them.
>
> This very short systemd snippet showed that systemd
2012/8/17 Kevin Chadwick :
>> Of course, you are free to adopt as late as possible,
>
> We are free to adopt never just with a lower chance of any support. It
> may be difficult to keep a thousand packages in check, it should not be
> difficult to keep the few each person uses in check and there wi
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 03:11:16PM +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> > Not because
> > it is good software but because the other adequate software that this
> > community depends on is going to require it.
>
> Let me know so I'm aware what the software you have in mind is if it
> hasn't been ment
On 08/17/2012 04:14 PM, Ben Booth wrote:
> Ben Booth wrote:
>
>>
>> Maybe I'll submit a feature request to the python package maintainer to
>> see if they think it's a good idea.
>
> I submitted a feature request in case anyone's interested:
>
> https://bugs.archlinux.org/index.php?do=details&ac
Kyle +1, personally its not as if they are forcing systemd on you they
aren't locking you out of your choice of an init system I've seen too many
people either unaware of this or have failed to remember that arch(as well
as linux in general) is a system of choices of which if you happen to find
som
Ben Booth wrote:
>
> Maybe I'll submit a feature request to the python package maintainer to
> see if they think it's a good idea.
I submitted a feature request in case anyone's interested:
https://bugs.archlinux.org/index.php?do=details&action=details.addvote&task_id=31179
Ben Booth wrote:
> Damjan wrote:
>
>>> The only problem with
>>> this approach is that /usr/bin/python is owned by the python package, so
>>> if you upgrade the python package it might create problems. Any one know
>>> of some way to work around this problem?
>>
>> Just put your script in /usr/l
Damjan wrote:
>> The only problem with
>> this approach is that /usr/bin/python is owned by the python package, so
>> if you upgrade the python package it might create problems. Any one know
>> of some way to work around this problem?
>
> Just put your script in /usr/local/bin
But then some scri
well, you're right... :P
so, no cronjobs XD
--
(\_ /) copy the bunny to your profile
(0.o ) to help him achieve world domination.
(> <) come join the dark side.
/_|_\ (we have cookies.)
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 1:36 AM, Damjan wrote:
> but which of is going to be executed?
>> /usr/bin or /usr/
but which of is going to be executed?
/usr/bin or /usr/local/bin?
/usr/local/bin is before /usr/bin in your PATH environment variable, so
the shell will first look there for programs. Check "echo $PATH" to see
what your path is.
--
дамјан
but which of is going to be executed?
/usr/bin or /usr/local/bin?
--
(\_ /) copy the bunny to your profile
(0.o ) to help him achieve world domination.
(> <) come join the dark side.
/_|_\ (we have cookies.)
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 9:09 PM, Ben Booth wrote:
> Lots of python scripts still use #
genius! :)
maybe a cronjob? (every 24 hours overwrite the script) (silly one)
maybe a startup overwrite?
or an aur package? (with interactive question if PYTHON is not set!)
--
(\_ /) copy the bunny to your profile
(0.o ) to help him achieve world domination.
(> <) come join the dark side.
/_|_\
The only problem with
this approach is that /usr/bin/python is owned by the python package, so if
you upgrade the python package it might create problems. Any one know of
some way to work around this problem?
Just put your script in /usr/local/bin
--
--
дамјан
According to Justin Strickland:
heh seems most of this blaze has to do with users who are unfamiliar with
systemd and by convention afraid of it, I suppose the devs could lay down the
law and just be like 'this is what arch is going to ship with and this is what
we are going to support get ove
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 10:14 AM, mike cloaked wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 10:22 PM, Myra Nelson wrote:
>> of lib and lib64 to /usr/lib, I'm basically ambivalent. I still don't like
>> not being able to put /usr on a separate partition, I know there's a
>> mkinitcpio hook to cover that, but
On 15/08/2012 8:05 AM, Felipe Contreras wrote:
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Leon Feng wrote:
[snip]
Arch is always give user's their options they want.
You can use initscript, even if systemd is the default just like I can
use systemd now when initscript is the default. Switch from one to
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 11:09 AM, mike cloaked wrote:
> True but see my posting in another thread in this mailing list today
> pointing to some rather more useful stats.
>
Actually better than a poll are the comments that appear in:
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=145943
--
mike c
Lots of python scripts still use #!/usr/bin/python instead of explicitly
stating which version of python to use. Here's quick trick to make running
various python version 2 or 3 scripts easier:
remove the /usr/bin/python symlink and replace with this shell script:
#!/usr/bin/env bash
exec /usr/
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 4:08 AM, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 2:57 AM, Geoff wrote:
> > On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 16:22:56 -0500
> > Myra Nelson wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > I agree. I have read all the current threads and the few words which
> struck me
> > with greatest force wer
On 08/17/2012 09:10 AM, David C. Rankin wrote:
> On 08/17/2012 10:49 AM, David C. Rankin wrote:
>> Guys,
>>
>> Reading the wiki pages regarding /etc/modules-load.d and /etc/modprobe.d,
>> is the only difference that makes /etc/modules-load.d to correct place for
>> the .conf file a lack of option
On 08/17/2012 10:49 AM, David C. Rankin wrote:
Guys,
Reading the wiki pages regarding /etc/modules-load.d and /etc/modprobe.d,
is the only difference that makes /etc/modules-load.d to correct place for the
.conf file a lack of options required on module load?
Or put another way, if option
On 08/17/2012 08:49 AM, David C. Rankin wrote:
> Guys,
>
> Reading the wiki pages regarding /etc/modules-load.d and /etc/modprobe.d, is
> the only difference that makes /etc/modules-load.d to correct place for the
> .conf file a lack of options required on module load?
>
> Or put another way,
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 03:11:16PM +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> > Not because
> > it is good software but because the other adequate software that this
> > community depends on is going to require it.
>
> Let me know so I'm aware what the software you have in mind is if it
> hasn't been ment
Guys,
Reading the wiki pages regarding /etc/modules-load.d and /etc/modprobe.d,
is the only difference that makes /etc/modules-load.d to correct place for the
.conf file a lack of options required on module load?
Or put another way, if options need to be provided along with the module
na
Am 17.08.2012 17:28, schrieb Fred Verschueren:
>> I downgraded to systemd-187-4 but have still the same problem.
>>
>> Any hints where to start searching?
>> Fred
>>
> I found a work around:
>
> if I replace in fstab
> /dev/mapper/nvidia_cjjcaiiep1 /home ext3
> defaults,acl
On 08/16/12 08:59, Fred Verschueren wrote:
Op 15-08-12 18:49, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto schreef:
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Mikael Eriksson
wrote:
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 01:50:01PM +0200, Fred Verschueren wrote:
My problem:
When booting with init=/bin/systemd I have the following phen
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:23 PM, te...@broletto.org wrote:
>> most of which are systems using systemd. Given that so many machines
>> are currently running systemd it can't be all that bad! This is of
>>
> How many machines are currently running Windows*?
>
Surely that is not particularly relev
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 01:25:46PM +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> I wouldn't touch Avahi with a barge pole either.
Unfortunately I don't see any alternative to it. Can you point one out,
if any? I use it for bonjour protocol support.
> Not because
> it is good software but because the other adequate software that this
> community depends on is going to require it.
Let me know so I'm aware what the software you have in mind is if it
hasn't been mentioned please.
Debian and Ubuntu plus the BSDs make up far more of the user
On Fri, 17 Aug 2012 14:03:17 +0200
Rodrigo Rivas wrote:
> Some people fear that if you use it you will be giving something to that
> unknown project behind systemd.
> But if it takes you where you don't want to go, it can be forked. It has
> happened before with bigger projects.
Yes, but I
Hi,
+1 for your post. I am really happy for the freedom too.
But what I feel is either systemd, GNOME and stuff would takeover linux
and drown. Or they will take over linux and flourish or they will be
separated into their own Linux space and isolated. I have got a big
feeling that they will
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 01:02:45AM +0200, Rodrigo Rivas wrote:
> But you linked to the "Appeal to novelty" fallacy, suggesting that other
> people argue that systemd is better just because it is new. Fallacies
> usually come in pairs, thus my link: changing for change's sake makes no
> sense; nor d
I received a single link
On Aug 17, 2012 8:30 AM, "Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia" <
archli...@ishpeck.net> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 07:06:36AM +, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> > BTW, I don't want to discourage anyone from reading Lennart's blog.
> > It's very revealing at some points. Just
On 17/08/2012 5:47 AM, Thomas Rand wrote:
Thank you for starting a thread that (crosses fingers) will stay rant
free & intelligent.
After reading all the who-har in the other's I decided to install
systemd on my lappy & TBH was very pleased with the result. That being
that the install itself wa
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 07:06:36AM +, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> BTW, I don't want to discourage anyone from reading Lennart's blog.
> It's very revealing at some points. Just know what you are reading.
>
No, it's important to understand the full arguments before you
criticize them. The first
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 04:08:32AM -0500, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
> initiatives like this are not removing choice
... Kinda.
This initiative doesn't remove choice. It is a natural consequence
of the greater linux ecosystem choosing to abandon some choices.
Am convinced that moving to systemd
> But if it takes you where you don't want to go, it can be forked. It has
> happened before with bigger projects.
That's true but no one can do that on a whim and apparently (Redhat
Dev) the code is rediculously hard to follow and review. I believe the
ones who would do that will likely just star
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 01:52:05AM -0400, Justin Strickland wrote:
> heh seems most of this blaze has to do with users who are unfamiliar with
> systemd and by convention afraid of it
I've seen a couple of people for whom this is probably true.
But I have seen a couple of posts that seem more ed
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Geoff wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Aug 2012 04:08:32 -0500
> C Anthony Risinger wrote:
>
>
>
> >
> > the boot process isn't really that interesting (once you
> > know/understand it anyway ... if not i encourage you to explor ;-) --
> > every distro pretty much does it t
Jn
Inviato da HTC
- Reply message -
Da: "Jorge Almeida"
A: "General Discussion about Arch Linux"
Oggetto: [arch-general] Arch Linux and systemd
Data: ven, ago 17, 2012 11:48
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 10:31 AM, mike cloaked wrote:
> most of which are systems using systemd. Given that s
> BTW, I don't want to discourage anyone from reading Lennart's blog.
How pulse is perfect for pro audio because of it's latency. I was
going to ping that to Ralf but thought his blood pressure was
already high enough ;-)
--
___
> Of course, you are free to adopt as late as possible,
We are free to adopt never just with a lower chance of any support. It
may be difficult to keep a thousand packages in check, it should not be
difficult to keep the few each person uses in check and there will
always be other distros without
On Fri, 17 Aug 2012 04:08:32 -0500
C Anthony Risinger wrote:
>
> the boot process isn't really that interesting (once you
> know/understand it anyway ... if not i encourage you to explor ;-) --
> every distro pretty much does it the same way, but pointlessly
> independent, thus resulting in an
On Fri, 17 Aug 2012 09:57:51 +
Fons Adriaensen wrote:
+1 to every word. I ran LFS for three years, partly because I wanted to learn
and partly to avoid the issues you mention. I left only because at that point in
my life it was too time-consuming and Arch offered an ideal alternative.
Geo
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Heiko Baums wrote:
> Am Fri, 17 Aug 2012 10:20:47 +0100
> schrieb mike cloaked :
>
>> Isn't it interesting that the vote is currently 81% support for arch
>> to switch to systemd (even with the misspelling in the poll), and only
>> 19% against! Looks like at leas
Am Fri, 17 Aug 2012 10:20:47 +0100
schrieb mike cloaked :
> Isn't it interesting that the vote is currently 81% support for arch
> to switch to systemd (even with the misspelling in the poll), and only
> 19% against! Looks like at least from the perspective of this poll
> (even with only 237 vote
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 04:08:32AM -0500, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
> no flexibility is lost by moving to systemd, and really, much more
> gained: wider userbase, wider testbase, simple units to write, simple
> units to read, loosely coupled ordering, implicit dependencies, Grand
> Unified logging
2012/8/17 mike cloaked :
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 10:22 PM, Myra Nelson wrote:
>> There has been much ado on the arch-general mailing list about the move to
>> systemd. I participated in part of it, but like others finally tired of
>> "seeing a dead horse kicked" over and over and over. So much s
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 10:31 AM, mike cloaked wrote:
> most of which are systems using systemd. Given that so many machines
> are currently running systemd it can't be all that bad! This is of
>
How many machines are currently running Windows*?
Jorge Almeida
On 17 August 2012 11:31, mike cloaked wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 10:22 PM, Myra Nelson wrote:
>> There has been much ado on the arch-general mailing list about the move to
>> systemd. I participated in part of it, but like others finally tired of
>> "seeing a dead horse kicked" over and ove
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 10:22 PM, Myra Nelson wrote:
> There has been much ado on the arch-general mailing list about the move to
> systemd. I participated in part of it, but like others finally tired of
> "seeing a dead horse kicked" over and over and over. So much so that the
> last dev who real
I used to have seperate /usr partition, previous year, I didn't remember
details but
there was a bug that force me to reinstall my sytem without a sperate /usr
partition.
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 10:14:58AM +0100, mike cloaked wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 10:22 PM, Myra Nelson wrote:
> > of l
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Jérôme Bartand wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Yesterday I read on Phoronix that Arch devs are planning to switch to
> SystemD, but many users are unhappy with this move. You can see a lot of
> controversy discussion on this list. I have created an online poll to
> determine the
2012/8/17 Geoff :
> On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 16:22:56 -0500
> Myra Nelson wrote:
>
>
>
> I agree. I have read all the current threads and the few words which struck
> me
> with greatest force were in a post from Marti Raudsepp, where he said that an
> advantage of systemd is "... less fragmentation
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 10:22 PM, Myra Nelson wrote:
> of lib and lib64 to /usr/lib, I'm basically ambivalent. I still don't like
> not being able to put /usr on a separate partition, I know there's a
> mkinitcpio hook to cover that, but I can see the logic in cleaning up the
Thank you for a reas
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 2:57 AM, Geoff wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 16:22:56 -0500
> Myra Nelson wrote:
>
>
>
> I agree. I have read all the current threads and the few words which struck
> me
> with greatest force were in a post from Marti Raudsepp, where he said that an
> advantage of system
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Jérôme Bartand wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Yesterday I read on Phoronix that Arch devs are planning to switch to
> SystemD, but many users are unhappy with this move.
>
It's systemd -- not SystemD. Learn more about it, please:
http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/syst
hello,
can anyone help me use fprint with gdm?
su, sudo and login works just nice
also, when I try to fprint-enroll wether i specify -f left-index-finger or
not, it will ask for my right index
thank you in advance!
--
(\_ /) copy the bunny to your profile
(0.o ) to help him achieve world domina
On Thursday 16 Aug 2012 20:54:21 Ionut Biru wrote:
> with or without this poll, we are continuing with our plan.
+1
--
Cheers and Regards
Jayesh Badwaik
stop html mail | always bottom-post
www.asciiribbon.org | www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 16:22:56 -0500
Myra Nelson wrote:
I agree. I have read all the current threads and the few words which struck me
with greatest force were in a post from Marti Raudsepp, where he said that an
advantage of systemd is "... less fragmentation between Linux distribution". I
hav
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 11:43:18AM +0800, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> Could those receiving these emails please speak out? I haven't, for one.
> Not that much can be done about it..
A third one arrived.
BTW, I don't want to discourage anyone from reading Lennart's blog.
It's very revealing at some point
70 matches
Mail list logo
