On Saturday, August 11, 2012 18:02:04, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 03:38:25PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
> >> systemd may seem better in /most/ cases because it does have some nice
> >> features, but I don't think it's better in *all* cases. systemd doesn't
> >> allow shutdo
> On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 03:38:25PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
>> systemd may seem better in /most/ cases because it does have some nice
>> features, but I don't think it's better in *all* cases. systemd doesn't
>> allow
>> shutdown/reboot from within KDE4
It *does* work for me here - KDM doesn'
On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 03:38:25PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
> systemd may seem better in /most/ cases because it does have some nice
> features, but I don't think it's better in *all* cases. systemd doesn't
> allow
> shutdown/reboot from within KDE4
That doesn't sound like an inherent systemd
On Saturday, August 11, 2012 01:12:10, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 08/11/2012 05:53 AM, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
> > Declaring "one area -- one chosen tool" is declaring the monopoly in the
> > area. As with other monopolies, this often leads to "vendor" lock-in,
> > stagnation, stopping developin
On 08/11/2012 10:29 PM, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Aug 11, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
>
the programs are systemd and udev. If we can have an alternative,
>^^
>
>
>> Please stop saying "we". *You* are not Debian. Thanks.
>>
> Pot.
On Aug 11, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> >> the programs are systemd and udev. If we can have an alternative,
^^
> Please stop saying "we". *You* are not Debian. Thanks.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On 08/11/2012 05:14 PM, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Aug 11, Thomas Goirand wrote
>> Exactly! And in this particular case, the "vendor" is RedHat, and
>> the programs are systemd and udev. If we can have an alternative,
>> using OpenRC and mdev, then I really welcome it! Choosing systemd
>> just becau
On Aug 11, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Exactly! And in this particular case, the "vendor" is RedHat, and
> the programs are systemd and udev. If we can have an alternative,
> using OpenRC and mdev, then I really welcome it! Choosing systemd
> just because it *seem* to look better *now*, knowing that
On Sat, 11 Aug 2012, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
> On 08/11/12 01:12, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > There are choices that we don't support because the process of supporting
> > that choice would involve far more work than benefit, and the final goal
> > is excellence, not choice for its own sake. For exam
❦ 11 août 2012 01:12 CEST, Josselin Mouette :
>> Declaring "one area -- one chosen tool" is declaring the monopoly in the
>> area. As with other monopolies, this often leads to "vendor" lock-in,
>> stagnation, stopping developing the standards. Have seen examples of all
>> that occasionally.
>
>
Too bad, a personal attack in the first (level of) answer already.
On 2012-08-10 20:22, Steve Langasek wrote:
[...]
> ... says the man who thinks multiarch should be held up indefinitely because
> a perl reimplementation of apt should take precedence.
No, I don't think so. Neither of 'multiarch s
11 matches
Mail list logo
