On 27/07/12 15:45, Stephen E. Baker wrote:
> On 27/07/2012 9:29 AM, Mike wrote:
>> On 27/07/12 13:57, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:
>>> The 27/07/12, Mike wrote:
>>>
I'm aware of that, but that doesn't mean one can't fix them. Nobody
said, that the code base of sysvinit shouldn't be modified.
>
On Jul 27, 2012 3:57 PM, "Tom Gundersen" wrote:
>
>
> On Jul 27, 2012 3:25 PM, "Jameson" wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 6:21 PM, Myra Nelson
wrote:
> > > quickly adapt to these types of changes. Many don't seem to grasp the
> > > concept that both systems are still supported. In my case
On Jul 27, 2012 3:25 PM, "Jameson" wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 6:21 PM, Myra Nelson
wrote:
> > quickly adapt to these types of changes. Many don't seem to grasp the
> > concept that both systems are still supported. In my case because of
> > my bull head and set ways, I still use the /etc/
On Jul 27, 2012 3:16 PM, "Kevin Chadwick" wrote:
>
> > > May be this is a silly question but: will there be a general
announcement
> > > when systemd became officially adopted?
> >
> > That would be announced, yes.
>
> As you have said the timescale for initscripts being replaced by
> systemd co
On 27/07/2012 9:29 AM, Mike wrote:
On 27/07/12 13:57, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:
The 27/07/12, Mike wrote:
I'm aware of that, but that doesn't mean one can't fix them. Nobody
said, that the code base of sysvinit shouldn't be modified.
It would have been fixed for a long time if it were easy enou
On 27/07/12 13:57, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:
> The 27/07/12, Mike wrote:
>
>> I'm aware of that, but that doesn't mean one can't fix them. Nobody
>> said, that the code base of sysvinit shouldn't be modified.
> It would have been fixed for a long time if it were easy enough. :-)
>
Uhm there are init
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 6:21 PM, Myra Nelson wrote:
> quickly adapt to these types of changes. Many don't seem to grasp the
> concept that both systems are still supported. In my case because of
> my bull head and set ways, I still use the /etc/rc.d/network script
> for starting my network and let
> > May be this is a silly question but: will there be a general announcement
> > when systemd became officially adopted?
>
> That would be announced, yes.
As you have said the timescale for initscripts being replaced by
systemd comes down to the challenges of maintenance and I guess this
is
On 27/07/12 09:18, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:
> The 27/07/12, Mike wrote:
>
>> Instead of fixing such problems we need something new that's broken too?
> You have to know that fixing was tried more than once with various
> approaches along time. Parallelism is one of the best-known of these
> failed a
On Jul 27, 2012 6:21 AM, "Martin Cigorraga" wrote:
>
> May be this is a silly question but: will there be a general announcement
> when systemd became officially adopted?
That would be announced, yes.
> As T. G. said in the Dev list:
> "If a move should happen, I suggest waiting a bit longer unt
May be this is a silly question but: will there be a general announcement
when systemd became officially adopted?
As T. G. said in the Dev list:
"If a move should happen, I suggest waiting a bit longer until more unit
files have been added to our various packages. And to allow some more time
to se
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 8:00 AM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Baho Utot wrote:
>> On Thursday, July 26, 2012 05:22:09 PM Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Ralf Mardorf
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>> > On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 16:48 +0800, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
>>> >> t
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 05:22:09PM +0800, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> Yeah, because key=value pairs are more complicated then, you know, a
> programming language?
Apples and oranges.
What you read in a bash script is what actually gets executed.
And this is being done by a tool that is not specific for
On Thursday, July 26, 2012 11:13:42 AM Nicholas MIller wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Mike wrote:
> > On 26/07/12 16:35, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:
> >> The 26/07/12, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 11:57 +0200, Dennis Herbrich wrote:
> >>>
> >>> By the way ...
> >>>
>
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Mike wrote:
> On 26/07/12 16:35, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:
>
>> The 26/07/12, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 11:57 +0200, Dennis Herbrich wrote:
>>>
>>> By the way ...
>>> ... is there the need to improve something that already works
>>>
>>
On 26/07/12 16:35, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:
The 26/07/12, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 11:57 +0200, Dennis Herbrich wrote:
By the way ...
... is there the need to improve something that already works
As I've already said, it does NOT work. Systems based on init scripts
are BROKEN
On Thursday, July 26, 2012 12:07:02 PM Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 11:57 +0200, Dennis Herbrich wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:52:49AM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 12:43 +0300, Mantas Mikulėnas wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Jayesh
On Thursday, July 26, 2012 11:57:26 AM Dennis Herbrich wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:52:49AM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 12:43 +0300, Mantas Mikulėnas wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Jayesh Badwaik
> > >
> > > wrote:
[putolin]
> > Sorry, what kind o
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Baho Utot wrote:
> On Thursday, July 26, 2012 05:22:09 PM Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Ralf Mardorf
>>
>> wrote:
>> > On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 16:48 +0800, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
>> >> those are bash scripts
>> >
>> > Exactly, but what is better whe
On Thursday, July 26, 2012 11:31:49 AM Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 17:22 +0800, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Ralf Mardorf
> >
> > wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 16:48 +0800, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> > >> those are bash scripts
> > >
> > > Exactly, but what
On Thursday, July 26, 2012 05:22:09 PM Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Ralf Mardorf
>
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 16:48 +0800, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> >> those are bash scripts
> >
> > Exactly, but what is better when we need to use irrational cryptic text
> > files to set
On Thursday, July 26, 2012 04:48:30 PM Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:30 PM, Jayesh Badwaik
>
> wrote:
[putolin]
> Actually, re-reading that, I'm not sure you understand too much about
> how initscripts work (and what they do) either. Not that I'm an expert
> myself, but when you
> "systemctl list-unit-files" gives a very nice and quick overview.
> Otherwise you can use "tree /etc/systemd/system" if that is what you
> prefer. I don't see the point of doing that, but if that's what floats
> your boat, it should give you the same information without the use of
> a tool.
The
On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 13:29 +0200, Dennis Herbrich wrote:
> Arch Linux is one of the "less painful" distributions, as you rightly put it.
> Let's keep it that way, along with the "early adopter" spirit.
I promised to be quiet, forgive me for replying again, in this case I've
to apologize, since Ar
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Ralf Mardorf
wrote:
> For example, how should (others and) I know that just "Before" or
> "After" is needed?
By reading the manpage: "If a unit foo.service contains a setting
Before=bar.service and both units are being started, bar.service's
start-up is delayed un
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
>> I still believe that there should be a script/program which can output
>> all the configurations from different file onto the terminal describing the
>> currently configured boot process.
>
>
> I nice perhaps ncurses gui or any config dis
On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 13:19 +0200, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> This is not true. You only need to specify either Before= or After=,
> not both. The reason that both exist, is that you should have the
> choice of which .service file to add the dependency.
And step by step it becomes easier to understand
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 12:59:29PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 12:31 +0200, Alexandre Ferrando wrote:
> > On 26 July 2012 12:07, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > > I don't claim to be an expert, I already mentioned that I'm a dummy. So
> > > again: Is Linux in the future for experts
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Ralf Mardorf
wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 16:48 +0800, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
>> those are bash scripts
>
> Exactly, but what is better when we need to use irrational cryptic text
> files to set up or Linux, instead of easy to understand bash scrips?
I don't understa
On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 12:52 +0200, Dennis Herbrich wrote: [snip]
Fair play. So we've got Arch for experts and Ubuntu using Unity for
idiots, but no Linux for averaged people?!
I'm kidding! For good reasons I still recommend Ubuntu/Debian and Arch,
depending to the users needs. Until now everything
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Jayesh Badwaik
wrote:
> DISCLAIMER: I support systemd but haven't switched to it yet, because I
> haven't had time till now, and also because I have some concerns. I like
> the ease-of-use that systems like PA/Systemd brings but I sincerely
> appreciate issues lik
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 12:45:28PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> "Never change a winning team" as long as your alternative for sure does
> improve the computer usage for everybody.
I assume you wanted to say "unless" instead of "as long as".
First off, "everybody" is not Arch Linux' target demogra
I'd like to know how many "basic unskilled" users have noticed when
fedora moved to systemd ?
That should be a good way to inform the community about this technical switch.
Best,
Antoine
2012/7/26 Ralf Mardorf :
> On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 12:31 +0200, Alexandre Ferrando wrote:
>> On 26 July 2012 12
On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 12:31 +0200, Alexandre Ferrando wrote:
> On 26 July 2012 12:07, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > I don't claim to be an expert, I already mentioned that I'm a dummy. So
> > again: Is Linux in the future for experts only?
> >
>
> Arch has always been targeted towards a competent userb
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 12:07:02PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> I don't claim to be an expert, I already mentioned that I'm a dummy. So
> again: Is Linux in the future for experts only?
I'm at a loss what kind of answer you are expecting, nobody has any "right" or
even the ability to answer such a
On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 11:57 +0200, Dennis Herbrich wrote:
> By the way ...
... is there the need to improve something that already works, while
there are other things that still don't work? Do you give a guarantee
that systemd won't make things more complicated and that everything,
every user use
On 26 July 2012 12:07, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> I don't claim to be an expert, I already mentioned that I'm a dummy. So
> again: Is Linux in the future for experts only?
>
Arch has always been targeted towards a competent userbase, if you're
not that kind of person, there's still distros that don't
On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 11:57 +0200, Dennis Herbrich wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:52:49AM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 12:43 +0300, Mantas Mikulėnas wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Jayesh Badwaik
> > > wrote:
> > > > With respect to daemons, the BEFORE a
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:52:49AM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 12:43 +0300, Mantas Mikulėnas wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Jayesh Badwaik
> > wrote:
> > > With respect to daemons, the BEFORE and AFTER in the service files is
> > > redundant and though not like
> I still believe that there should be a script/program which can output
> all the configurations from different file onto the terminal describing the
> currently configured boot process.
I nice perhaps ncurses gui or any config displaying binary always comes
along but shouldn't be required
> I read it, and all I have to say is that you obviously haven't done
> much (or any?) reading on systemd. That should be a pre-requisite to
> posting a request for information, and it IS if you're an Arch (DIY)
> user.
I read it and there are valid points for and against that some choose
to ignor
On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 12:43 +0300, Mantas Mikulėnas wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Jayesh Badwaik
> wrote:
> > With respect to daemons, the BEFORE and AFTER in the service files is
> > redundant and though not likely to cause errors, likely to be
> > inconsistent, because for every ser
On Thursday 26 Jul 2012 16:48:30 Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> I read it, and all I have to say is that you obviously haven't done
> much (or any?) reading on systemd. That should be a pre-requisite to
> posting a request for information, and it IS if you're an Arch (DIY)
> user.
>
At one point, I had read
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Jayesh Badwaik
wrote:
> With respect to daemons, the BEFORE and AFTER in the service files is
> redundant and though not likely to cause errors, likely to be
> inconsistent, because for every service file where a daemon "xyz" appears
> in AFTER, the corresponding
On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 17:22 +0800, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Ralf Mardorf
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 16:48 +0800, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> >> those are bash scripts
> >
> > Exactly, but what is better when we need to use irrational cryptic text
> > files to set up or Li
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Ralf Mardorf
wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 16:48 +0800, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
>> those are bash scripts
>
> Exactly, but what is better when we need to use irrational cryptic text
> files to set up or Linux, instead of easy to understand bash scrips?
Yeah, because key
On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 16:48 +0800, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> those are bash scripts
Exactly, but what is better when we need to use irrational cryptic text
files to set up or Linux, instead of easy to understand bash scrips?
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:30 PM, Jayesh Badwaik
wrote:
>
> Thanks for reading such a long mail if you have reached this far!
I read it, and all I have to say is that you obviously haven't done
much (or any?) reading on systemd. That should be a pre-requisite to
posting a request for information,
Hi,
DISCLAIMER: I support systemd but haven't switched to it yet, because I
haven't had time till now, and also because I have some concerns. I like
the ease-of-use that systems like PA/Systemd brings but I sincerely
appreciate issues like the ones Ralf Mardorf and others have and I
sincerely
49 matches
Mail list logo
