[2017-01-19 10:37] Simon McVittie
> On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 at 23:21:46 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > I have done this now, with a changelog entry that closes these two
> > bugs. I think that is appropriate but I'm sure someone will complain
> > if not.
>
> I still think it would be good for sysvi
Hi Ian,
Thank you for the follow up.
Ian Jackson writes:
> I see that we have offers of help from various people in #811377.
>
> I have also added Benda Xu, based on
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=811377#25
> I see that Benda doesn't seem to be a DD. Needless to say I am
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 11:21:46PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> With sysvinit being maintained in collab-maint, I think Benda won't be
> able to push to it directly. Benda, I suggest that if you want to
> contribute you make a git branch in a tree of your own on alioth, and
> use git-request-pull.
Simon McVittie writes ("Bug#851747: sysvinit-utils: unmaintained package should
not be Essential"):
> So I would prefer if you didn't close #851747, but I'm dropping its
> severity: a maintained package in the Essential set is a lot better
> than an unmaintained on
Control: retitle 851747 sysvinit-utils: drop Essential flag
Control: severity 851747 wishlist
On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 at 23:21:46 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I have done this now, with a changelog entry that closes these two
> bugs. I think that is appropriate but I'm sure someone will complain
> if
Petter Reinholdtsen writes ("Bug#851747: sysvinit-utils: unmaintained package
should not be Essential"):
> [Ian Jackson]
> > I don't want to do an upload of this package just to change the
> > Uploaders - particularly at this stage of the release.
>
> Why not?
[Ian Jackson]
> I don't want to do an upload of this package just to change the
> Uploaders - particularly at this stage of the release.
Why not? I would guess particularly at this stage in the release, it is
smart to trim the list of maintainers down to those that plan to spend
time on the sysvi
Am 18.01.2017 um 15:23 schrieb Felipe Sateler:
>> /sbin/fstab-decode
>
> I see only drbl and open-iscsi use this[1], so they could start
> depending on sysvinit-utils too.
>
open-iscsi ships a native service file, so this would only matter for
the case where sysvinit is the active PID 1 in which
Ian Jackson writes ("Bug#851747: sysvinit-utils: unmaintained package should
not be Essential"):
> Simon McVittie writes ("Bug#851747: sysvinit-utils: unmaintained package
> should not be Essential"):
> > sysvinit appears to be unmaintained, but it builds an Essen
On 18 January 2017 at 09:48, Simon McVittie wrote:
> Package: sysvinit-utils
> Version: 2.88dsf-59.8
> X-Debbugs-Cc: init-system-help...@packages.debian.org,
> debianut...@packages.debian.org
>
> sysvinit appears to be unmaintained, but it builds an Essential package
> (sysvinit-utils) that must
Hello Simon,
Simon McVittie [2017-01-18 12:48 +]:
> /lib/init/init-d-script
> /lib/init/vars.sh
These two are entirely Debian specific, so I don't think keeping them in
sysvinit-utils hurts much anytime soon.
> /bin/pidof == /sbin/killall5 (same program)
This already got discussed a while a
Simon McVittie writes ("Bug#851747: sysvinit-utils: unmaintained package should
not be Essential"):
> sysvinit appears to be unmaintained, but it builds an Essential package
> (sysvinit-utils) that must be installed on all Debian systems. This
> seems like a bad situation.
I&#
Package: sysvinit-utils
Version: 2.88dsf-59.8
X-Debbugs-Cc: init-system-help...@packages.debian.org,
debianut...@packages.debian.org
sysvinit appears to be unmaintained, but it builds an Essential package
(sysvinit-utils) that must be installed on all Debian systems. This
seems like a bad situati
13 matches
Mail list logo
