Svante Signell writes ("Re: upgrades must not change the installed init system
[was: Re: Cinnamon environment now available in testing]"):
> As you can see from that bug report the systemd maintainers overrides
> every attempt to change severity of that bug to wishlist and won
On Fri, 2014-09-26 at 13:04 +0200, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> On 11/09/14 14:36, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 21:36 +, Nick Phillips wrote:
> > [...]
> >> Debian has a good and hard-earned reputation for not messing up
> >> sysadmins' changes; upgrading to systemd - h
On 11/09/14 14:36, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 21:36 +, Nick Phillips wrote:
> [...]
>> Debian has a good and hard-earned reputation for not messing up
>> sysadmins' changes; upgrading to systemd - however wonderful it is (and
>> I confess to having no opinion on that) - withou
On Wednesday, 10 de September de 2014 21:26:50 Matthias Urlichs escribió:
> Hi,
>
> Steve Langasek:
> > On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 08:28:36PM +0100, Marcin Kulisz wrote:
> > > What about cases when init scripts doesn't come from any package but
> > > are crafted by hand?
> >
> > It's straightforward
On Thursday, 11 de September de 2014 08:00:57 Marc Haber escribió:
> On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 00:04:07 -0300, Martinx - ?
>
> wrote:
> > Also, during Debian 8 installation, please, provide an "altinit" option (
> >
> >http://pyro.eu.org/debian/pool/main/d/debian-altinit/ ?), so, people can
> >choo
On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 05:58:11 +0200, Matthias Urlichs
wrote:
>Marc Haber:
>> sysvinit init scripts will suffer heavy bitrot in jessie+1.
>>
>Possibly. But let's get Jessie out the door first …
So that it'll be completely impossible to roll back?
Not that I seriously believe that we got the balls
Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez writes:
> On 09/09/14 22:34, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
>> I truly believe that making systemd the default without asking the user
>> to test it first, is going to cause more breakage and angry users than
>> doing it the other way.
>
> s/making systemd the defaul
Hi,
Marc Haber:
> sysvinit init scripts will suffer heavy bitrot in jessie+1.
>
Possibly. But let's get Jessie out the door first …
--
-- Matthias Urlichs
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debia
On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 16:27:58 +0200, Thorsten Glaser
wrote:
>Nobody says jessie+1 will not permit running sysvinit any more,
>and the CTTE rulings explicitly did not touch that topic which
>implies some amount of scepsis.
sysvinit init scripts will suffer heavy bitrot in jessie+1.
Greetings
Marc
On Wed, 10 Sep 2014, Nick Phillips wrote:
> Debian has a good and hard-earned reputation for not messing up
> sysadmins' changes
Agreed. This is about the only thing I can currently use to
argue for use of Debian over *buntu in some places.
> So, is it actually feasible to provide such a prompt?
On Tue, 9 Sep 2014, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> We could delay the transition-on-upgrade by one release, but the
> migration from sysvinit to systemd on a Jessie -> Jessie+1 upgrade will
> probably end up less tested (though systemd itself would probably be
> more tested by then).
Nobody says jessi
On Tue, 9 Sep 2014, Mathieu Parent wrote:
> 4) Upgrade to systemd silently without asking the user AND add a grub
> entry to use old init
These are the Linux bootloaders I came up within less than
five minutes of searching the ’net:
• Acronis OS Selector
• AiR-Boot
• AKernelLoader
• AMIBOOT
• AP
Daniel Dickinson writes:
> I will add that for a distribution that claims to be about it's users,
> the systemd attitude of "We're *going* to use systemd so 'suck it up
> Buttercup' really stinks at a social level.
Debians' decision to support systemd already violates Debians' social
contract.
On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 21:36 +, Nick Phillips wrote:
[...]
> Debian has a good and hard-earned reputation for not messing up
> sysadmins' changes; upgrading to systemd - however wonderful it is (and
> I confess to having no opinion on that) - without at least a debconf
> prompt of a reasonable p
Marcin Kulisz wrote:
> On 2014-09-09 18:23:58, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > Michael Biebl wrote:
> > > Together with the /lib/sysvinit/init fallback binary in sysvinit and
> > > (and optionally my patch getting merged for grub [1]), this should
> > > provide for a hopefully seamless upgrade experience.
On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 00:04:07 -0300, Martinx - ?
wrote:
> Also, during Debian 8 installation, please, provide an "altinit" option (
>http://pyro.eu.org/debian/pool/main/d/debian-altinit/ ?), so, people can
>choose between systemd / sysvinit (before 1st boot). I know that it seems
>easy to just
On 11/09/14 12:10 AM, Daniel Dickinson wrote:
>
> I will add that for a distribution that claims to be about it's users,
> the systemd attitude of "We're *going* to use systemd so 'suck it up
> Buttercup' really stinks at a social level.
Especially since 'Free' is supposed to be 'as in Freedom no
For the heck of it, I will add that if in my job I pushed out crap like
Network Manager and Pulseaudio at the time of introduction as 'the
saviour of the Linux desktop' as a production release I would have fired
long ago.
Regards,
Daniel
On 11/09/14 12:10 AM, Daniel Dickinson wrote:
>
> I will
I will add that for a distribution that claims to be about it's users,
the systemd attitude of "We're *going* to use systemd so 'suck it up
Buttercup' really stinks at a social level.
Not to mention, as many have pointed out, transition to systemd is *not*
going to be painless and without problem
Hi!
Yes, please... I vote +1 for *not silently replace* sysvinit by systemd,
when upgrading from Debian 7, to 8.
Also, during Debian 8 installation, please, provide an "altinit" option (
http://pyro.eu.org/debian/pool/main/d/debian-altinit/ ?), so, people can
choose between systemd / sysvinit (
On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 18:37 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 17:44 +0100, Noel Torres wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 10 de September de 2014 03:12:16 Ben Hutchings escribió:
> > > On Tue, 2014-09-09 at 21:24 +0100, Noel Torres wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, 9 de September de 2014 21:18:55
Hi,
Steve Langasek:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 08:28:36PM +0100, Marcin Kulisz wrote:
> > What about cases when init scripts doesn't come from any package but are
> > crafted by hand?
>
> It's straightforward to check for init scripts that are not owned by any
> packages.
>
… and besides, systemd
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 08:28:36PM +0100, Marcin Kulisz wrote:
> What about cases when init scripts doesn't come from any package but are
> crafted by hand?
> Those can not be easily detected and compared for changes, as they are not
> coming from any package and they may (and in some cases are)
On 2014-09-09 18:23:58, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Michael Biebl wrote:
> > Together with the /lib/sysvinit/init fallback binary in sysvinit and
> > (and optionally my patch getting merged for grub [1]), this should
> > provide for a hopefully seamless upgrade experience.
>
> Agreed, this seems like t
On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 17:44 +0100, Noel Torres wrote:
> On Wednesday, 10 de September de 2014 03:12:16 Ben Hutchings escribió:
> > On Tue, 2014-09-09 at 21:24 +0100, Noel Torres wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, 9 de September de 2014 21:18:55 Tollef Fog Heen escribió:
> > > > ]] Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez
On Wednesday, 10 de September de 2014 03:12:16 Ben Hutchings escribió:
> On Tue, 2014-09-09 at 21:24 +0100, Noel Torres wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 9 de September de 2014 21:18:55 Tollef Fog Heen escribió:
> > > ]] Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez
> > >
> > > > But if you don't (Is not uncommon to have serve
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014, at 04:12, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-09-09 at 21:24 +0100, Noel Torres wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 9 de September de 2014 21:18:55 Tollef Fog Heen escribió:
> > > ]] Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez
> > >
> > > > But if you don't (Is not uncommon to have servers on remote locat
On Tue, 2014-09-09 at 21:24 +0100, Noel Torres wrote:
> On Tuesday, 9 de September de 2014 21:18:55 Tollef Fog Heen escribió:
> > ]] Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez
> >
> > > But if you don't (Is not uncommon to have servers on remote locations
> > > that are only accessible via ssh) and the machine do
Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 09.09.2014 17:15, schrieb Ansgar Burchardt:
> > Having only some systems switch to a different init system on upgrade
> > seems potentially confusing to me.
>
> Agreed. We definitely should switch the machines on upgrades. There is a
> good reason why we also did it when
On 09/09/14 23:17, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
>> That way of testing is completely unreliable when we are talking about
>> > low level stuff (kernel/udev/systemd).
> No, it's not. It is able to emulate most of the concerns people are
> talking about in this thread. Nobody has so far showed up and bee
]] Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez
> On 09/09/14 22:18, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > ]] Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez
> >
> >> But if you don't (Is not uncommon to have servers on remote locations
> >> that are only accessible via ssh) and the machine don't boots properly
> >> you can find yourself in tr
On 09/09/14 22:34, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> I truly believe that making systemd the default without asking the user
> to test it first, is going to cause more breakage and angry users than
> doing it the other way.
s/making systemd the default/replacing the user init system with systemd
On 09/09/14 22:18, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> ]] Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez
>
>> But if you don't (Is not uncommon to have servers on remote locations
>> that are only accessible via ssh) and the machine don't boots properly
>> you can find yourself in trouble.
>
> Then surely you test the upgrade
On Tuesday, 9 de September de 2014 21:18:55 Tollef Fog Heen escribió:
> ]] Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez
>
> > But if you don't (Is not uncommon to have servers on remote locations
> > that are only accessible via ssh) and the machine don't boots properly
> > you can find yourself in trouble.
>
> Th
]] Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez
> But if you don't (Is not uncommon to have servers on remote locations
> that are only accessible via ssh) and the machine don't boots properly
> you can find yourself in trouble.
Then surely you test the upgrade before making it live, using kvm
-snapshot or simila
* Michael Biebl [140909 11:43]:
> Am 09.09.2014 17:15, schrieb Ansgar Burchardt:
> > Having only some systems switch to a different init system on upgrade
> > seems potentially confusing to me.
>
> Agreed. We definitely should switch the machines on upgrades. There is a
> good reason why we also
* Mathieu Parent [140909 09:15]:
> 2014-09-09 13:46 GMT+02:00 Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez :
> [...]
> > So, when upgrading from Wheezy to Jessie, we have three options:
> >
> > 1) Keep the user init system (sysvinit most probably)
> > 2) Upgrade to systemd after asking the user.
> > 3) Upgrade to s
* Ansgar Burchardt [140909 11:16]:
> On 09/09/2014 16:59, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > I don't believe we should switch init systems on upgrade without at least
> > a prompt,
>
> I think there are good arguments for both switching to the new default
> and not:
Perhaps, but not without giving the sysa
On 09/09/14 15:14, Mathieu Parent wrote:
> 2014-09-09 13:46 GMT+02:00 Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez :
> [...]
>> So, when upgrading from Wheezy to Jessie, we have three options:
>>
>> 1) Keep the user init system (sysvinit most probably)
>> 2) Upgrade to systemd after asking the user.
>> 3) Upgrade to
Am 09.09.2014 17:15, schrieb Ansgar Burchardt:
> Having only some systems switch to a different init system on upgrade
> seems potentially confusing to me.
Agreed. We definitely should switch the machines on upgrades. There is a
good reason why we also did it when switching to dependency based boo
Ansgar Burchardt writes:
> On 09/09/2014 17:01, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> The original plan was to have the question owned by some package that
>> could then switch the init symlink from one implementation to another.
>> That way, no abort is required. I'm not sure if that survived contact
>> with
On 09/09/2014 17:01, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Vincent Danjean writes:
>> I agree with your analysis. However, how do you think we can ask the
>> user ? We can have a debconf question. However, whatever the answer is,
>> we must not return an error (i.e. aborting the upgrade). It is really a
>> pain t
On 09/09/2014 16:59, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez writes:
>> So, when upgrading from Wheezy to Jessie, we have three options:
>
>> 1) Keep the user init system (sysvinit most probably)
>> 2) Upgrade to systemd after asking the user.
>> 3) Upgrade to systemd silently without as
Vincent Danjean writes:
> I agree with your analysis. However, how do you think we can ask the
> user ? We can have a debconf question. However, whatever the answer is,
> we must not return an error (i.e. aborting the upgrade). It is really a
> pain to recover when this occurs.
The original plan
Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez writes:
> Most of our users don't care as long as their machines continue to work
> as expected after an upgrade.
> So, when upgrading from Wheezy to Jessie, we have three options:
> 1) Keep the user init system (sysvinit most probably)
> 2) Upgrade to systemd after a
Samuel Thibault writes:
> When I got "upgraded" to systemd on july, my system was completely
> misbehaving for several reasons related to my configuration:
> - I had an ISO mount in my fstab, whose file didn't exist any more,
> sysvinit never complained about it, systemd just stopped at boot.
S
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014, at 15:14, Mathieu Parent wrote:
> 4) Upgrade to systemd silently without asking the user AND add a grub
> entry to use old init
I like this approach very much since it's least intrusive to the upgrade
process, but provides a emergency fallback in default installation.
O.
--
2014-09-09 15:14 GMT+02:00 Mathieu Parent :
> 2014-09-09 13:46 GMT+02:00 Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez :
> [...]
>> So, when upgrading from Wheezy to Jessie, we have three options:
>>
>> 1) Keep the user init system (sysvinit most probably)
>> 2) Upgrade to systemd after asking the user.
>> 3) Upgrade
2014-09-09 13:46 GMT+02:00 Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez :
[...]
> So, when upgrading from Wheezy to Jessie, we have three options:
>
> 1) Keep the user init system (sysvinit most probably)
> 2) Upgrade to systemd after asking the user.
> 3) Upgrade to systemd silently without asking the user.
4) Upg
Ondřej Surý, le Tue 09 Sep 2014 13:10:48 +0200, a écrit :
> > And I'm saying that I don't think this is an isolated case,
>
> And I'm saying that all we have is anecdotal evidence
Our uni lab has switched to systemd, 20% of the machines do not boot.
The admin is currently looking at what the diff
Samuel Thibault, le Tue 09 Sep 2014 14:11:28 +0200, a écrit :
> I have made a quick poll among various people here and there, there is
> no real consensus, either on switching to systemd by default or keeping
> with sysvinit by default. So it seems to me a question during upgrade is
> needed.
(mor
Matthias Urlichs, le Tue 09 Sep 2014 13:49:54 +0200, a écrit :
> Samuel Thibault:
> > > So please fill a bug for every breakage you will encounter, so it
> > > can be either fixed or documented.
> >
> > There will be dozens of them then. Will they really be fixed in time for
> > Jessie?
> >
> We
On 09/09/2014 13:46, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> So, when upgrading from Wheezy to Jessie, we have three options:
>
> 1) Keep the user init system (sysvinit most probably)
> 2) Upgrade to systemd after asking the user.
> 3) Upgrade to systemd silently without asking the user.
[...]
> I und
On 09/09/2014 13:10, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> And I'm saying that all we have is anecdotal evidence and we all
> know what we step into when we run our systems on jessie or sid.
> So please fill a bug for every breakage you will encounter, so it
> can be either fixed or documented.
Did you look at the
Hi,
Samuel Thibault:
> > So please fill a bug for every breakage you will encounter, so it
> > can be either fixed or documented.
>
> There will be dozens of them then. Will they really be fixed in time for
> Jessie?
>
We don't know yet. Would you rather have bugs which are not even reported,
an
On 09/09/14 13:10, Ondřej Surý wrote:
>> > I believe most our users prefer to stay with sysvinit when upgrading from
>> > wheezy
> And I believe that most our users don't care. But I as a maintainer
> and operator of several daemons I really do care to have as most
> unified environment for debugg
Samuel Thibault, le Tue 09 Sep 2014 13:19:31 +0200, a écrit :
> > > I believe most our users prefer to stay with sysvinit when upgrading from
> > > wheezy
> >
> > And I believe that most our users don't care.
>
> I believe most of our users care about an upgrade to Jessie that doesn't
> bring re
Ondřej Surý, le Tue 09 Sep 2014 13:10:48 +0200, a écrit :
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2014, at 11:54, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Ondřej Surý, le Tue 09 Sep 2014 11:47:38 +0200, a écrit :
> > > And you are saying that you can do all those tweaks, but you cannot
> > > pin systemd-sysv to not install?
> >
> > N
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014, at 11:54, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Ondřej Surý, le Tue 09 Sep 2014 11:47:38 +0200, a écrit :
> > And you are saying that you can do all those tweaks, but you cannot
> > pin systemd-sysv to not install?
>
> No, I'm saying that if I hadn't noticed "systemd" among the upgrades, I
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014, at 09:11, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > You cannot have an MTA without configuring it, and nobody even tried to
> > implement auto-migration of the old default mailer's configuration to the
> > new one. Also, we didn't switch to a different default mailer because the
> > new one o
Ondřej Surý, le Tue 09 Sep 2014 11:47:38 +0200, a écrit :
> switch the default init to systemd as Debian
> maintainers who would like to keep their sanity would do.
I have lost my sanity about system boot & shutdown since when I have
switched to systemd. Really.
Samuel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
Ondřej Surý, le Tue 09 Sep 2014 11:47:38 +0200, a écrit :
> And you are saying that you can do all those tweaks, but you cannot
> pin systemd-sysv to not install?
No, I'm saying that if I hadn't noticed "systemd" among the upgrades, I
would have gotten all these changes all of a sudden without ask
> You cannot have an MTA without configuring it, and nobody even tried to
> implement auto-migration of the old default mailer's configuration to the
> new one. Also, we didn't switch to a different default mailer because the
> new one offered a heap of features and infrastructure which the other
>
Hi Jonas,
On Montag, 8. September 2014, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> I did not file a bugreport about that - where could I?
upgrade-reports seems to be the pseudo package you want. See
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=upgrade-reports :-)
cheers,
Holger
signature.asc
Des
El lun, 8 de sep 2014 a las 9:07 , Matthias Urlichs
escribió:
Hi,
Vincent Danjean:
If I recall correctly, when Debian switched the default MTA,
upgrades
did not change the already installed.
You cannot have an MTA without configuring it, and nobody even tried
to
implement auto-migration
Quoting Vincent Danjean (2014-09-08 21:37:14)
> On 08/09/2014 18:07, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
>> Vincent Danjean:
>>> If I recall correctly, when Debian switched the default MTA,
>>> upgrades did not change the already installed.
>>
>> You cannot have an MTA without configuring it, and nobody even
On Mon, 8 Sep 2014 18:07:18 +0200, Matthias Urlichs
wrote:
>Vincent Danjean:
>> If I recall correctly, when Debian switched the default MTA, upgrades
>> did not change the already installed.
>
>You cannot have an MTA without configuring it, and nobody even tried to
>implement auto-migration of the
On 08/09/2014 18:07, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Vincent Danjean:
>> If I recall correctly, when Debian switched the default MTA, upgrades
>> did not change the already installed.
>
> You cannot have an MTA without configuring it, and nobody even tried to
> implement auto-migration of the o
On Sat, Sep 06, 2014 at 09:39:05AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Note also that a few of those things (udev, adduser, and
> libdevmapper1.02.1 for example) are likely to be on any non-chroot system
> already since they're either dependencies of other things (such as grub
> for libdevmapper1.02.1) or
On Sat, Sep 06, 2014 at 02:33:04PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> Ok, so let's quantify the view of sysadmins somehow.
This is a complete waste of time and I expect better of you in particular.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Tro
Hi,
Vincent Danjean:
> If I recall correctly, when Debian switched the default MTA, upgrades
> did not change the already installed.
You cannot have an MTA without configuring it, and nobody even tried to
implement auto-migration of the old default mailer's configuration to the
new one. Also, we
On 08/09/2014 15:27, Noel Torres wrote:
> On Sunday, 7 de September de 2014 23:45:12 David Weinehall escribió:
>> On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 12:37:12PM -0700, Cameron Norman wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 1:57 AM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Noel Torres wrote:
> So we are clearly failing to f
On 08/09/14 14:44, Noel Torres wrote:
> Example: having EMC Networker server softare for backups in a sysvinit
> machine
> is (relatively) easy, because the scripts for starting and stopping the
> services are (quite) standard (but very complicated) sysv scripts.
systemd is compatible with LSB
On Sunday, 7 de September de 2014 16:11:02 Matthias Urlichs escribió:
> Hi,
>
> Chris Bannister:
> > > If technically feasible, that would be a far better safety net (just
> > > tell people to boot with init=/sbin/sysvinit if they run into a
> > > problem) than an "oh dear, it's so dangerous that
On Sunday, 7 de September de 2014 23:45:12 David Weinehall escribió:
> On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 12:37:12PM -0700, Cameron Norman wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 1:57 AM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > > Noel Torres wrote:
> > >> So we are clearly failing to follow the least surprise (for the user)
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 09/08/2014 at 02:05 AM, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 07, 2014 at 11:12:01PM +1200, Chris Bannister wrote:
>
>> Surely, it should be an OPT-IN choice, not an OPT-OUT one? I'm
>> talking upgrades here, not new installs.
>
> I have no clue
* Josselin Mouette , 2014-09-08, 10:58:
Excuse me? Are you trying to use the fact that you and your stupid
friends are trolling about systemd all day long in order to justify
your own rants?
And I thought you couldn’t get any lower. You have a very good shovel.
OTOH, a hydraulic excavator mu
Adam Borowski wrote:
> Noel Torres writes:
> > So, in your POV, forcing millions of sysadmins out there to take
extra pain to
> > keep their systems running as they expect is the way to go?
>
> I think it's fair to expect the few hundred people[1] that wa
On Sun, Sep 07, 2014 at 11:12:01PM +1200, Chris Bannister wrote:
> Surely, it should be an OPT-IN choice, not an OPT-OUT one? I'm talking
> upgrades here, not new installs.
I have no clue why we are continuing to discuss this. The ctte
resolution says that "the default init system for Linux archit
El dom, 7 de sep 2014 a las 3:45 , David Weinehall
escribió:
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 12:37:12PM -0700, Cameron Norman wrote:
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 1:57 AM, Josselin Mouette
wrote:
> Noel Torres wrote:
>> So we are clearly failing to follow the least surprise (for the
user) path.
>>
>>
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 12:37:12PM -0700, Cameron Norman wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 1:57 AM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Noel Torres wrote:
> >> So we are clearly failing to follow the least surprise (for the user) path.
> >>
> >> Should not logind depend on systemd-shim | systemd-sysv instea
Hey.
On Sat, 2014-09-06 at 14:08 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Steve, as long as bugs like [1] are not fixed in systemd-shim, I'm not
> going to make it the first alternative. Installing a half-broken logind
> whould be a disservice to our users.
Kinda strange to use *that* as an argument, while
On Sun, 07 Sep 2014 15:30:11 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen
wrote:
>You make the assumption that there's not been an tries to resolve this,
>which is wrong. As for security, well, I have a keyscript that unlocks
>my boot drive just fine, but handled through initramfs, not systemd.
Those tries are invisi
Hi,
Chris Bannister:
> > If technically feasible, that would be a far better safety net (just tell
> > people to boot with init=/sbin/sysvinit if they run into a problem) than
> > an "oh dear, it's so dangerous that we don't even install it by default"
> > message. :-/
>
> Surely, it should be an
Hi,
On Samstag, 6. September 2014, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> No. I expect them all to continue running just peachy fine and seamlessly.
> I also expect the Jessie upgrade to switch to systemd. Because, frankly and
> strictly IMHO, doing anything else makes no sense whatsoever.
>
> On the other ha
]] Marc Haber
> On Sat, 6 Sep 2014 15:56:23 +0200, Matthias Urlichs
> wrote:
> >Marc Haber:
> >> On Fri, 05 Sep 2014 15:12:50 +0200, Svante Signell
> >> wrote:
> >> >On Fri, 2014-09-05 at 14:20 +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> >> >> Thus, unless the user explicitly tells the apt{-get,itude} sub
On 2014-09-07, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> I had my systems painfully and transparantly upgraded to systemd. And
> I'm happy it happens. Please keep it this way.
I apparantly like pain. or maybe s/ful/less/ is the appropriate reading.
/Sune
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.deb
On 2014-09-07, Chris Bannister wrote:
> Surely, it should be an OPT-IN choice, not an OPT-OUT one? I'm talking
> upgrades here, not new installs.
I had my systems painfully and transparantly upgraded to systemd. And
I'm happy it happens. Please keep it this way.
I do want my systems to look the
Am 07.09.2014 14:08, schrieb Thorsten Glaser:
> On Sat, 6 Sep 2014, Michael Biebl wrote:
>
>> Steve, as long as bugs like [1] are not fixed in systemd-shim, I'm not
>> going to make it the first alternative. Installing a half-broken logind
>> whould be a disservice to our users.
>
> Uhm, did you
On Sat, 6 Sep 2014, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Steve, as long as bugs like [1] are not fixed in systemd-shim, I'm not
> going to make it the first alternative. Installing a half-broken logind
> whould be a disservice to our users.
Uhm, did you read this subthread at all?
Let me try to summarise:
At
On Sun, Sep 07, 2014 at 12:18:08PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Zack Weinberg:
> > I think this strategy is positively _necessary_ in order to ensure
> > that systems currently running Wheezy can safely be upgraded to
> > Jessie. There are simply too many wacky configurations out ther
Hi,
Zack Weinberg:
> I think this strategy is positively _necessary_ in order to ensure
> that systems currently running Wheezy can safely be upgraded to
> Jessie. There are simply too many wacky configurations out there; it
If we do decide that a default switch is unsafe for too many systems, t
On Sat, 6 Sep 2014 15:56:23 +0200, Matthias Urlichs
wrote:
>Marc Haber:
>> On Fri, 05 Sep 2014 15:12:50 +0200, Svante Signell
>> wrote:
>> >On Fri, 2014-09-05 at 14:20 +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
>> >> Thus, unless the user explicitly tells the apt{-get,itude} subsystem not
>> >> to switch to
Zack Weinberg wrote:
> Matthias Urlichs wrote:
>> I also expect the Jessie upgrade to switch to systemd. Because,
>> frankly and strictly IMHO, doing anything else makes no sense
>> whatsoever.
> This is exactly the thing I don't agree with.
> I think _new installs_ of Jessie should use systemd
On Sep 06, Sven Joachim wrote:
> Here's what I get when replacing sysvinit-core with systemd-sysv in my
> pbuilder chroot:
To be fair, most of these packages (adduser, kmod, udev and their
dependencies, for a start) would be installed anyway on a normal system
which is not a minimal chroot.
If
Sven Joachim writes:
> On 2014-09-05 23:50 +0200, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> That seems much higher than I believe is the case. Wasn't there a
>> detailed analysis of this posted a while back? My vague recollection
>> was a number more on the order of a quarter of that, and with most of
>> those be
Matthias Urlichs wrote:
>
> I also expect the Jessie upgrade to switch to systemd. Because,
> frankly and strictly IMHO, doing anything else makes no sense
> whatsoever.
This is exactly the thing I don't agree with.
I think _new installs_ of Jessie should use systemd as init (by
default, anyway),
Hi,
Noel Torres:
> Do you think it is realistic to expect them all reading some obscure
> documentation _before_ upgrading?
>
No. I expect them all to continue running just peachy fine and seamlessly.
I also expect the Jessie upgrade to switch to systemd. Because, frankly and
strictly IMHO, doin
Hi,
Adam Borowski:
> Thus, Slashdot post count is more meaningful than, say, counting posts
> here on unmoderated debian-devel.
>
That doesn't change the fact that most people who are OK with systemd have,
to put it mildly, better things to do these days than to participate in yet
another "discus
Hi,
Marc Haber:
> On Fri, 05 Sep 2014 15:12:50 +0200, Svante Signell
> wrote:
> >On Fri, 2014-09-05 at 14:20 +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> >> Thus, unless the user explicitly tells the apt{-get,itude} subsystem not
> >> to switch to systemd (by whatever means, the details of which I personally
1 - 100 of 140 matches
Mail list logo
