Hello dear,
Did you receive my email message to you? Please, get back to me ASAP as the
matter is becoming late. Expecting your urgent response.
Regards,
Sean
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Nicholas D Steeves
Package name: auto-dictionary-el
Version : 1.1
Upstream Author : Nikolaj Schumacher
URL : https://wiki.debian.org/EmacsenTeam/Team
License : GPL-2+
Programming Lang: elisp
Description : automatic dictio
Hi,
út 18. 9. 2018 v 12:27 odesílatel Michael Biebl napsal:
> Fwiw, we had a similar issue in udev, see
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=903224
> for the gory details.
>
thanks.
> Have you tried running your swift service with an older (say v232 from
> stable) systemd?
> Do
Hi,
út 18. 9. 2018 v 12:18 odesílatel Michael Biebl napsal:
> assume you (re)start your service in postinst? In this case you need a
> running systemd >= 235 at that point.
>
yes.
> We do re-exec systemd in postinst, but a versioned Breaks or Conflicts
> does not give you the guarantee that
Am 18.09.18 um 12:00 schrieb Michael Biebl:
> I assume you (re)start your service in postinst? In this case you need a
> running systemd >= 235 at that point.
> We do re-exec systemd in postinst, but a versioned Breaks or Conflicts
> does not give you the guarantee that systemd.postinst has run bef
Am 18.09.18 um 09:21 schrieb Ondrej Novy:
> Hi,
>
> my package src:swift is not compatible with old systemd, because I'm
> using CacheDirectory in unit file. CacheDirectory is supported from
> systemd 235.
>
> I think correct solution is to add to binary package this relation:
> Breaks: systemd (
Hi,
út 18. 9. 2018 v 10:30 odesílatel Lars Wirzenius napsal:
> Would Conflicts work here?
>
Conflicts is just more strict Breaks, for example when files are
overwritten. This is not case and Breaks "is enough".
--
Best regards
Ondřej Nový
Email: n...@ondrej.org
PGP: 3D98 3C52 EB85 980C 46A5
On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 09:21:11AM +0200, Ondrej Novy wrote:
> I think my solution is correct, because Swift works with any init system
> and I want to only say "it doesn't work with older systemd". I don't think
> it's correct to list all possible init systems in Depends.
Would Conflicts work her
Hi,
my package src:swift is not compatible with old systemd, because I'm
using CacheDirectory in unit file. CacheDirectory is supported from systemd
235.
I think correct solution is to add to binary package this relation:
Breaks: systemd (<< 235~)
Thomas Goirand (zigo) said it's wrong and correc
9 matches
Mail list logo
