Neil Williams writes:
>> Please reconsider this. If I wrote a little GUI calculator and made it
>> depend on e.g. upstart, would that also make upstart unsuitable as a
>> default init system because of the resulting insane top-down
>> dependency?
>
> Yes.
Aeh, are you sure? I think you missed my
Paul Wise writes:
> I wasn't talking about link-order stuff but about dependency inflation;
> binaries linking against libraries that aren't used by the binaries
> linking against them. IIRC this is the purpose of --as-needed and what
> it works around.
> To clarify further, I think --as-needed
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 11:54 PM, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> epdfview depends on libqt
epdfview has been removed from Debian but it never depended on Qt, always GTK+:
http://bugs.debian.org/710550
http://packages.debian.org/source/stable/epdfview
> evince pulls in the whole of QT adding ages to th
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Colin Watson wrote:
> Linking in the correct order is not a workaround; it's being correct.
I wasn't talking about link-order stuff but about dependency
inflation; binaries linking against libraries that aren't used by the
binaries linking against them. IIRC this
> On Saturday, October 26, 2013 10:45:55 Charles Plessy wrote:
> >
> > Conflict of interest is not a judgement on a person. It is a judgement
> > about a situation, and a recommendation on how systematically react,
> > without making exceptions.
Le Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 10:31:32PM -0400, Scott Ki
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 11:02:13PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> # systemd units on my laptop that are generated internally by systemd
> # when it reads a sysvinit script (or "LSB init script" as it
> # calls them)
> % systemctl list-units | grep LSB | wc -l
That's only currently loaded units, i.e
On Oct 26, Luca Capello wrote:
> A small note: does anyone consider that there are still people on
> not-so-fast Internet connections?
Yes: unless they need to install multiple computers (unusual, I think)
and do not know how to share the downloaded packages among them, then
netinstall is the m
Johannes Schauer wrote:
Until these two issues are fixed we will not be able to get an algorithmic
answer to the question of what constitutes the minimum required set of
packages.
There is also the complication of what I will call "non-key self
building compilers". fpc is an example
These a
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Jérémy Lal"
* Package name: node-range-parser
Version : 0.0.4
Upstream Author : TJ Holowaychuk
* URL : https://github.com/visionmedia/node-range-parser
* License : Expat
Programming Lang: JavaScript
Description
On 26/10/13 21:23, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> "Session tracking" includes suspending/hibernating, because logind has
>> a mechanism to let apps delay suspend, which is necessary for things
>> like closing the inherent race condition in "lock the screensaver when
>> we suspend... oh, oops, it didn't g
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Jérémy Lal"
* Package name: node-fresh
Version : 0.2.0
Upstream Author : TJ Holowaychuk
* URL : https://github.com/visionmedia/node-fresh
* License : Expat
Programming Lang: JavaScript
Description : Check freshn
On 25/10/13 16:28, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Fully supporting an init system means, among other things, writing or
> generating native configuration files for that init system so that we can
> take full (or at least fuller) advantage of its capabilities. We're
> currently not doing that for anything o
Johannes Schauer (2013-10-26):
> (I was not able to find the debian-ports list on lists.debian.org (so I
> subscribed via email) did I just miss it?)
Dead list: http://lists.debian.org/debian-ports/
AFAICT it's now an alias for all debian-$port lists.
Mraw,
KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Di
Hi,
(I was not able to find the debian-ports list on lists.debian.org (so I
subscribed via email) did I just miss it?)
Quoting Steven Chamberlain (2013-10-23 22:04:59)
> I had a play with the 'botch' tool (see description[1]) for determining build
> order when bootstrapping an architecture.
botc
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Jérémy Lal"
* Package name: node-raw-body
Version : 0.0.3
Upstream Author : Jonathan Ong
* URL : https://github.com/stream-utils/raw-body
* License : Expat
Programming Lang: JavaScript
Description : Request body
* Simon McVittie:
> "Session tracking" includes suspending/hibernating, because logind has
> a mechanism to let apps delay suspend, which is necessary for things
> like closing the inherent race condition in "lock the screensaver when
> we suspend... oh, oops, it didn't get scheduled until after w
Hi there!
On Sat, 26 Oct 2013 08:08:53 -0700, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 11:44:48PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> Yes, it can. It should contain enough of the packages needed to be
>> able to support all 4 of the recognised DEs. However, at current rates
>> it won't take
On Oct 26, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> If neither Upstart or Systemd works for these non-Linux ports, then
> there's OpenRC. Which is why I worked on it (and I did this, mainly
> because of "ethical and philosophical reasons" as you put it). It
> wouldn't hurt to have more help on it...
Having all pa
On Oct 26, Svante Signell wrote:
> This really pinpoints the whole problem: What happened to the Unix
> philosophy, with freedom of choice?
We killed it for good in 2008:
http://www.redhat.com/archives/rhl-devel-list/2008-January/msg00861.html
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital
On Sat, 2013-10-26 at 00:00 +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> > Pros:
> >
> > * CD#1 will work again without size worries
> >
> > * Smaller, simpler desktop
> >
> > * Works well/better on all supported kernels (?)
> >
> > * Does not depend on replacing init
>
> * Users can pick and choose com
Hi,
On Mittwoch, 23. Oktober 2013, Stewart Smith wrote:
> Jenkins can have slaves on remote hosts, via SSH. It runs a small java
> app there, so as long as the arch has a JVM then you're pretty right.
that JVM is not even needed, just schedule jobs via ssh and be done.
cheers,
Holger
On Oct 26, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> I'd find it very nice if we had, by default, DNSSEC resolving in Debian,
> at least in the "default" configuration (whatever that means). By this,
I agree with the general principle, but I do not think that a recursive
resolver should be installed by default on
On 10/26/2013 10:37 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> - Against systemd speaks that it's uncertain on whether there will be a
> solution in the end for the non-Linux UNIX flavours - which I think
> Debian should support for ethical and philosophical reasons.
> Admittedly I have no idea how the
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 10:46:38AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Steve Langasek writes:
> > I don't think either of these are the right question. Even if we change
> > the default init system for jessie, because we *must* support backwards
> > compatibility with sysvinit for upgrades, there is no
Hi Russ,
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013, at 18:20, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Thomas Goirand writes:
>
> > If this means installing a recursive DNS resolver by default (unbound
> > pops to my mind, since it has the feature by default), I'd say be it,
> > though probably that is more of an open question, and an
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013, at 18:58, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> I believe the reliability (DOS) issues that DNSSEC imposes coupled with
Please, not this again. If you say DNSSEC DOS issue, you must state all
the other issues that DNS has.
> the low level of adoption
It's certainly more adopted than IPv6
Steve Langasek writes:
> I don't think either of these are the right question. Even if we change
> the default init system for jessie, because we *must* support backwards
> compatibility with sysvinit for upgrades, there is no justification for
> requiring packages to do anything else for jessie
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 11:07:36AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> I think that there are two different questions:
> 1) Could you clarify which init system(s) must be supported by packages
>involved during system startup (daemons, etc.) and low-level services?
>[ the answer to that ques
> If I'm not mistaking (please correct me), Fedora has the feature, and
> it's been a long time they do. FreeBSD as well (they have unbound in the
> default installer). OpenBSD also removed bind and switched to unbound
> (or at least is planning on doing it, I'm not sure). Debian shouldn't be
> lef
> systemd doing more is quite relevant for this decision as far as I
> understand the discussion: unlike upstart, systemd is not just an init
> replacement, but offers additional services like journald or logind.
I don't mean to be rude but please read up on systemd and see the pros
of cons such a
> My understanding is that the _kernel_ side wants to change the cgroup
> API, and this means that at least in the long term current cgroup-using
> applications will need to change in any case (possibly by using systemd
> APIs instead). I'm not familiar with the specific case of lxc, but I
> really
> I recommend one more option, nicknamed "rotten tomatoes",
> that basically says that this GR should never have been proposed.
And even more so not listened to for a few reasons.
Little has changed since the last discussion that I feel came to a
reasonable current standing with an overview pos
> But that alone is not an argument against introducing new technologies.
> One just has to be careful in what is done.
Not against new technologies in general but if you are talking about
something which you expect every Linux user to use (when actually they
can't in deep embedded etc.) then yes
> Steve Langasek has been consistently posting dishonest FUD against
> systemd. Maybe you could explain that as excessive zeal following from
> valid technical considerations, but I'd consider that an excessively
> charitable interpretation for a member of a body that is supposed to
> have public t
> "Session tracking" includes suspending/hibernating, because logind has
> a mechanism to let apps delay suspend, which is necessary for things
> like closing the inherent race condition in "lock the screensaver when
> we suspend... oh, oops, it didn't get scheduled until after we
> resumed, so the
On Wed, 2013-10-23 at 23:42 +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-10-23 at 23:06 +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > And does this cause any problems actually? Does your system no longer
> > boot properly using sysvinit when systemd is installed?
>
> Well, gdm3 does not start for a
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 04:41:00PM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
>
>
> > On 26 Oct 2013, at 16:08, "Andrew M.A. Cater"
> > wrote:
> >
> > That wouldbe my preference - a tasksel change for "no desktop" "KDE" "GNOME"
> > "LXDE" XFCE" etc. for the netinst - default being no desktop - ideal for a
Off list.
Thanks!
Richard
What can be done to prevent rather than reacting to dependency hell all
the time. Some developers obviously get it and yet others seem to
pro-actively work in the other direction.
There was a time when it was said that this problem was finally heading
in the right direction.
There is an example t
> Of course, the gnome default makes adding gnome to the plot not
> currently useful. One nice side benefit of at least temporarily
> switching the default desktop to xfce would be that if a lot of people
> wanted gnome, rather than just picking it as the default, we'd see that
> reflected in the p
On Sat, 2013-10-26 at 08:34 +0300, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> Brian May wrote:
>
> > As much as I would like to see systemd as the default in Debian (and
> > have switched to it on my Desktops), I see two show stopper issues:
> >
> >
> > * Needs to work (somehow) with other applications (including not
Thomas Goirand writes:
> If this means installing a recursive DNS resolver by default (unbound
> pops to my mind, since it has the feature by default), I'd say be it,
> though probably that is more of an open question, and an implementation
> details. I personally wouldn't mind at all if the Debi
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013, at 16:37, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-10-26 at 10:00 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > GRs should be used for societal and policy[*] decisions. Using GRs for
> > *technical* decision is stupid.
> Is it for sure that this (and I guess it's mostly about ups
Hi,
I'd find it very nice if we had, by default, DNSSEC resolving in Debian,
at least in the "default" configuration (whatever that means). By this,
I mean that any non-experienced user would just install (or upgrade to)
Jessie, start a web browser (Chormium, Iceweasel, etc.: take your
pick...), a
Hi,
Christoph Anton Mitterer writes:
> On Sat, 2013-10-26 at 10:00 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>> GRs should be used for societal and policy[*] decisions. Using GRs for
>> *technical* decision is stupid.
> Is it for sure that this (and I guess it's mostly about upstart vs.
> systemd is *only
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 04:37:55PM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> [...] non-Linux UNIX flavours - which I think Debian should support for
> ethical and philosophical reasons.
Uh-oh.
--
WBR, wRAR
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sat, 2013-10-26 at 10:00 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> GRs should be used for societal and policy[*] decisions. Using GRs for
> *technical* decision is stupid.
Is it for sure that this (and I guess it's mostly about upstart vs.
systemd is *only* a technical question?
- Apparently both are
> On 26 Oct 2013, at 16:08, "Andrew M.A. Cater"
> wrote:
>
> That wouldbe my preference - a tasksel change for "no desktop" "KDE" "GNOME"
> "LXDE" XFCE" etc. for the netinst - default being no desktop - ideal for a
> minimum
> install.
I don't understand how that would work: I presume you do
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 07:09:45PM +0300, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> Steve Langasek has been consistently posting dishonest FUD against
> systemd. Maybe you could explain that as excessive zeal following from
> valid technical considerations, but I'd consider that an excessively
> charitable interpretati
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 4:00 AM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On one hand, the belief that every DD is technically omniscient is the
> reason why we still have so many pointlessly heated debates on this
> mailing list. We would have way less of those if we let only people who
> have a clue debate s
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 11:44:48PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Andy Cater wrote:
> >
> >I think it would be a good idea to have the netinst have an
> >additional option to select desktop easily including the option for
> >"command line only, no graphical desktop" as default.
>
> We already have
Clint - perhaps you and I can talk about this in Hong Kong?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5f7ce033-3ae0-4c17-8356-a31015a72...@patg.net
On 26/10/13 16:38, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Quoting Emilio Pozuelo Monfort (2013-10-26 13:03:13)
>> On 26/10/13 12:02, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
>>> On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 12:19:53AM +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
I have Gnucash installed and it depends on udisks, trust me I have
absolutel
Quoting Emilio Pozuelo Monfort (2013-10-26 13:03:13)
> On 26/10/13 12:02, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 12:19:53AM +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
>>> I have Gnucash installed and it depends on udisks, trust me I have
>>> absolutely no need for udisks or polkit, so don't be so su
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 12:02:00AM +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> > I'm fed up with repeated attempts to force components on the rest of the
> > system, but that's mostly a fault of Gnome's upstream
>
> There seems to be a trend emanating from packages involving RedHat devs.
> I actually went to t
> On 26 Oct 2013, at 13:00, Neil Williams wrote:
>
> Desktop
> components cannot dictate how the rest of the system operates.
The gnome folks are free to do what they please. They don't answer to us and
your repeated assertions that they're crossing a line just shine a light on
your own hubr
Le samedi 26 octobre 2013 à 13:03 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort a
écrit :
> On 26/10/13 12:02, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 12:19:53AM +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> >> I have Gnucash installed and it depends on udisks, trust me I have
> >> absolutely no need for udisks or po
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 14:58:34 -0700
Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> Neil Williams writes:
> > If someone comes up with good reasons to consider systemd on it's
> > own merit, I'm willing to consider it. With the current approach of
> > a fait-accompli "systemd is part of the GNOME dependency chain, so
> >
[Please don't top post on this mailing list!]
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 06:45:02PM +0200, Zlatan Todoric wrote:
> And just bashing GNOME DE for systemd and GNOME Classic
> is not good enough point because probably the largest user base
> of Debian user use GNOME.
That is because it is installed by
Zack wrote:
>
>Note that the *possibility* of taking technical decisions by GRs is
>important, as it provides a balance of powers within the project, but we
>should always do everything in our power to avoid doing that.
>
>The decisions about the init system (both "which are the supported
>ones?" a
On 26/10/13 12:02, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 12:19:53AM +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
>> I have Gnucash installed and it depends on udisks, trust me I have
>> absolutely no need for udisks or polkit, so don't be so sure (I am not
>> saying that I am sure that he is not).
>
>
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 12:19:53AM +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> I have Gnucash installed and it depends on udisks, trust me I have
> absolutely no need for udisks or polkit, so don't be so sure (I am not
> saying that I am sure that he is not).
gnucash → libgnome2-0 → gvfs → gvfs-daemons → libgd
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Nicolas Dandrimont
* Package name: websocket-client
Version : 0.12.0
Upstream Author : liris
* URL : https://github.com/liris/websocket-client
* License : LGPL-2.1+
Programming Lang: Python
Description : WebSocke
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Felix Geyer
* Package name: ruby-mizuho
Version : 0.9.19
Upstream Author : Hongli Lai
* URL : https://github.com/FooBarWidget/mizuho
* License : Expat
Programming Lang: Ruby
Description : Mizuho documentation form
On 25/10/13 at 12:16 -0400, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> In response to the recent threads, I'd like to ask the tech-ctte to
> please vote on and decide on the default init system for Debian.
I agree. I don't think that many substantial new arguments are going to
be brought by waiting more on this to
* Uoti Urpala [2013-10-25 18:27]:
> Steve Langasek has been consistently posting dishonest FUD against
> systemd. Maybe you could explain that as excessive zeal following from
> valid technical considerations, but I'd consider that an excessively
> charitable interpretation for a member of a body
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.9.4
Severity: wishlist
Le Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 09:28:32AM +0200, Ondřej Surý a écrit :
> Hi James,
>
> since the authoritative-name-server idea was rejected by the list, I was
> going to propose alternative:
>
> security-aware-resolver
>
> The definition from R
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:00:42PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Do, 24 Okt 2013, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > at this point, I would like to point at a very important part of the
> > "revised code of conduct" that Wouter is proposing: "Assume good faith".
>
> On Do, 24 Okt 2013, Adam Borowski
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 02:03:38PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Let’s GR it.
No. I think I've already argued in the past against this idea on -devel,
possibly even in reply to you, Thorsten. As I can't find my post back
then, let me reiterate.
GRs should be used for societal and policy[*] deci
On Sat, 26 Oct 2013 07:57:50 +0300
Uoti Urpala wrote:
> I am no longer willing to assume that Steve Langasek would act in good
> faith in evaluating init systems; he has posted false claims about
> systemd too many times for me to believe they would all be honest
> mistakes, and has posted what h
70 matches
Mail list logo
