On 29.11.2014 19:15, Svante Signell wrote:
> Since there is no interest in adding a debconf message on new installs,
> I wish for a menu entry in the advanced part of the installer to be able
> to install a new system with sysvinit-core or upstart!
+1
--
mit freundlichen Grüßen
--
Enrico Wei
On Fri, 2014-11-28 at 12:56 +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> Hello,
> In summary:
> a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be
> kept.
> b) New installs should get systemd-sysv as default init with a debconf
> message about alternative init systems.
>
> More detailed:
> 1
Quoting Tomas Pospisek (2014-12-01 17:57:12)
> Am 29.11.2014 um 22:01 schrieb Philipp Kern:
>> On 2014-11-29 21:30, Steve Langasek wrote:
>>> Debian releases when it's ready. If large numbers of our users are
>>> going to have a bad experience with jessie as a result of being
>>> switched to sys
Am 29.11.2014 um 22:01 schrieb Philipp Kern:
> On 2014-11-29 21:30, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> Debian releases when it's ready. If large numbers of our users are
>> going to
>> have a bad experience with jessie as a result of being switched to
>> systemd,
>> then we should take appropriate steps to
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 12:30 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 08:14:07PM +0100, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > That's even more unlikely than to add a debconf message (which would be
> > package-owned). Yes, debian-installer is frozen. This would add new
> > udebs, new strings, new
* Darren Salt [141130 14:17]:
> I demand that Stephan Seitz may or may not have written...
>
> > On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 02:41:23PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> >> On Nov 28, Svante Signell wrote:
> >>> a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be
> >>> kept.
> >> I disa
I demand that Stephan Seitz may or may not have written...
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 02:41:23PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>> On Nov 28, Svante Signell wrote:
>>> a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be
>>> kept.
>> I disagree: upgrades should get the default init sy
2014-11-29 22:25 GMT+01:00 Svante Signell :
> On Sat, 2014-11-29 at 22:01 +0100, Philipp Kern wrote:
>> On 2014-11-29 21:30, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> > Debian releases when it's ready. If large numbers of our users are
>> > going to
>> > have a bad experience with jessie as a result of being switc
[I've removed the blatant trolling from the subject line.]
Marc Haber wrote:
> With all the technical issues in systemd popping up just now, we have
> frozen prematurely.
On the contrary, that's precisely what the freeze is *for*: to stop
taking new development that doesn't fix bugs (and potentia
On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 12:30:49 -0800, Steve Langasek
wrote:
>On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 08:14:07PM +0100, Philipp Kern wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 07:15:08PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
>> > One claim is changed, see below.
>
>> > On Fri, 2014-11-28 at 12:56 +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
>> > > H
On Sat, 2014-11-29 at 22:01 +0100, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 2014-11-29 21:30, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Debian releases when it's ready. If large numbers of our users are
> > going to
> > have a bad experience with jessie as a result of being switched to
> > systemd,
> > then we should take appr
On 2014-11-29 21:30, Steve Langasek wrote:
Debian releases when it's ready. If large numbers of our users are
going to
have a bad experience with jessie as a result of being switched to
systemd,
then we should take appropriate steps to address that, even if that
means
unfreezing the installer
* Svante Signell , 2014-11-29, 21:27:
Debian will not be as it was historically
Indeed! Debian is going to be more awesome than it historically was
(with or without systemd overhead).
--
Jakub Wilk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubsc
On Sat, 2014-11-29 at 21:27 +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> But it does not seem like you are realizing what is
> happening unfortunately. Debian will not be as it was historically due
> to this issue. Maybe the new DDs are to young to learn from history?
Please don't patronise people. Just because
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 08:14:07PM +0100, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 07:15:08PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> > One claim is changed, see below.
> > On Fri, 2014-11-28 at 12:56 +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > > In summary:
> > > a) Upgrades should _not_ change in
On Sat, 2014-11-29 at 20:19 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-11-29 at 20:40 +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> > This is another nail in the Universal OS coffin: Let's move to devuan,
> > please!
>
> You are of course free to do that. This discussion is about what Debian
> should do, howev
On Sat, 2014-11-29 at 20:40 +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> This is another nail in the Universal OS coffin: Let's move to devuan,
> please!
You are of course free to do that. This discussion is about what Debian
should do, however. If you wish to discuss Devuan, please do so in a
more appropriate
On 29-11-2014 19:40, Svante Signell wrote:
[...]
> This is another nail in the Universal OS coffin: Let's move to devuan,
> please! Use Debian as upstream (as long as it lives)
>
> Yes, next Debian release is lendows, not jessie :(
Thanks! We appreciate less noise on these lists and on the next
On Sat, 2014-11-29 at 20:14 +0100, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 07:15:08PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> > One claim is changed, see below.
> >
> > On Fri, 2014-11-28 at 12:56 +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> > > Hello,
> >
> > > In summary:
> > > a) Upgrades should _not_ change i
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 07:15:08PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> One claim is changed, see below.
>
> On Fri, 2014-11-28 at 12:56 +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> > Hello,
>
> > In summary:
> > a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be
> > kept.
> > b) New installs shou
One claim is changed, see below.
On Fri, 2014-11-28 at 12:56 +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> Hello,
> In summary:
> a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be
> kept.
> b) New installs should get systemd-sysv as default init with a debconf
> message about alternative ini
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Am 28.11.2014 15:55, schrieb Marco d'Itri:
> > I have a system where the network connection is so important that the pppd
> > is invoked via the
inittab, which is a published interface of the init system and has been
for decades. When an upgrade
Matthias Urlichs writes:
> Non-standard inittab entries should surely be displayed and warned about,
> but IMHO that's not sufficient reason to not switch the other 99.99%
> who never touched their inittab.
In the server world, I'm pretty sure you are significantly underestimating
the number of
On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Stephan Seitz wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 04:00:42PM +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> > On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Stephan Seitz wrote:
> > > Of course not. syslog-ng was not replaced by rsyslog when Debian changed
> > > the default syslog.
> > Note that syslog-ng was not the de
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 04:00:42PM +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Stephan Seitz wrote:
Of course not. syslog-ng was not replaced by rsyslog when Debian
changed the default syslog.
Note that syslog-ng was not the default, but sysklogd (which was)
wasn’t replaced either. Thank
On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Stephan Seitz wrote:
> Of course not. syslog-ng was not replaced by rsyslog when Debian changed the
> default syslog.
Note that syslog-ng was not the default, but sysklogd (which was)
wasn’t replaced either. Thankfully.
> The grub1 bootloader was not replaced when Debian cha
On Nov 28, Simon Richter wrote:
> I disagree: This is not safe and can break systems.
Everything is not safe and can break systems, so this is not a very
compelling argument.
> I have a system where the network connection is so important that the
> pppd is invoked via the inittab, which is a pu
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 03:24:18PM +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>
> > No, the ctte did not say that. We had a flamewar about that
> > interpretation before.
>
> That was almost word by word from
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2014/
On 11/28/2014 03:24 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>> No, the ctte did not say that. We had a flamewar about that
>> interpretation before.
>
> That was almost word by word from
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2014/11/msg0.html
See [
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 02:41:23PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Nov 28, Svante Signell wrote:
a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be
kept.
I disagree: upgrades should get the default init system unless the
system administrator chooses otherwise.
Of course not.
On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> No, the ctte did not say that. We had a flamewar about that
> interpretation before.
That was almost word by word from
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2014/11/msg0.html
bye,
//mirabilos
--
>> Why don't you use JavaScript? I also
On 11/28/2014 03:16 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>> I disagree: upgrades should get the default init system unless the
>> system administrator chooses otherwise.
>
> I disagree with you, and so does CTTE, this time: they said
> that existing installations
Hi,
Simon Richter:
> I have a system where the network connection is so important that the
> pppd is invoked via the inittab, which is a published interface of the
> init system and has been for decades. When an upgrade installs
> systemd, this machine will simply drop off the network.
>
> Other
On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Nov 28, Svante Signell wrote:
>
> > a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be
> > kept.
> I disagree: upgrades should get the default init system unless the
> system administrator chooses otherwise.
I disagree with you,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
On 28.11.2014 14:41, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>> a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed
>> should be kept.
> I disagree: upgrades should get the default init system unless the
> system administrator chooses otherwise.
I disagre
On 2014-11-28 14:41, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Nov 28, Svante Signell wrote:
>
> [...]
>> b) New installs should get systemd-sysv as default init with a debconf
>> message about alternative init systems.
> It would be totally unacceptable to waste the time of every Debian user
> with pointless ad
On 28/11/14 11:56, Svante Signell wrote:
3) Add information in release-notes on how to:
- Upgrade from stable/testing/sid to jessie to avoid getting
systemd-sysv installed (this should not strictly be needed if the ctte
chooses to decide that upgrades will _not_ switch init)
This part has alrea
On Nov 28, Svante Signell wrote:
> a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be
> kept.
I disagree: upgrades should get the default init system unless the
system administrator chooses otherwise.
> b) New installs should get systemd-sysv as default init with a debconf
>
On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Svante Signell wrote:
> the order of pre-depends for int init package should change from
> Pre-Depends: systemd-sysv | sysvinit-core | upstart
> to
> Pre-Depends: sysvinit-core | systemd-sysv | upstart
That would probably require changes in d-i to ensure that
systemd is, inde
Hello,
In the (last) hope that the CTTE will bring this issue on the agenda
next meeting on December 4. Additional information below and a short
summary.
On Wed, 2014-11-26 at 09:56 +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Nov 2014, Svante Signell wrote:
>
> > (another partial? solution is to
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 04:23:19PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-11-26 at 14:46 +, Neil McGovern wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 09:29:28PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> > > 1) Heavily advertise (release-notes?) that doing an upgrade from
> > > wheezy/etc to jessi
On Wed, 2014-11-26 at 14:46 +, Neil McGovern wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 09:29:28PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> > 1) Heavily advertise (release-notes?) that doing an upgrade from
> > wheezy/etc to jessie will give you systemd as init system and inform
> > about the apt pinning
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 09:29:28PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> 1) Heavily advertise (release-notes?) that doing an upgrade from
> wheezy/etc to jessie will give you systemd as init system and inform
> about the apt pinning solution.
>
> 3) Heavily advertise (again in release notes?) that y
On Wed, 2014-11-26 at 09:56 +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Nov 2014, Svante Signell wrote:
> Does that work,
> anyway (i.e. does installing systemd and immediately
> reverting to sysvinit leave the system net unchanged,
> modulo the dependencies it pulls in (see planet post))?
I've i
On Wed, 2014-11-26 at 09:56 +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Nov 2014, Svante Signell wrote:
> > 2) In case you missed doing the above, you get a debconf prompt when
>
> No, no, no, no, no, no, no!
>
> Again: aborting the dist-upgrade in the debconf of one
> package may leave the syste
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014, Svante Signell wrote:
> (another partial? solution is to change order of the (pre-)depends of
> the init package, as proposed in
No, that breaks due to the bug in debootstrap’s dependency “resolver”
(see #557322, #668001, #768062) and the unwillingness of KiBi to fix
that. Th
Hello,
Below is a proposal for a (partial) solution for the upgrade problem of
keeping the installed init system:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=765803
This has been discussed privately among selected users/DM/DDs and since
the deadline for the ctte is December 4, it has to be
47 matches
Mail list logo
