On 11/7/09, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Sat, 2009-11-07 at 14:00:23 +, Alan Jenkins wrote:
>> On 9/5/09, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>> > change the init.d script
>> > handling to treat upstart jobs as init.d scripts, to provide an
>> > alternative for architectures lacking upstart suppo
Hi!
On Sat, 2009-11-07 at 14:00:23 +, Alan Jenkins wrote:
> On 9/5/09, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > change the init.d script
> > handling to treat upstart jobs as init.d scripts, to provide an
> > alternative for architectures lacking upstart support
> I read this as a euphemism for non-li
On 9/5/09, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>
> The future of the boot system in Debian
> ===
...
body omitted; see <http://lwn.net/Articles/351013/>
...
> Petter Reinholdtsen, Kel Modderman, Armin Berres
>
Thanks for the informative announ
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 03:35:41PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
> > IME, simple initrds that don't really impact on your hability to boot
> > are fine (and great to load firmware, CPU microcode and kernel modules),
> > but anything else (like root on lvm or on non-auto-started md arrays)
> > will ca
On Sun, 27 Sep 2009, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> For which I am very grateful. The backlash against über-fragile and
> over-complex boot environments has already started, and you could see it
> really well in LKML (refer for the tmpdevfs threads, for example).
> RedHat's initrd has often
On Mon, 7 Sep 2009, Gabor Gombas wrote:
> The original announcement said that Fedora is already using upstart.
> AFAIK Fedora is also commited to using SELinux. Do they use a similar
> patch? Can they help convincing upstream?
Sorry for the delay in responding.
In terms of the upstream SE Linux
On Sat, 26 Sep 2009, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Sep 2009, Gabor Gombas wrote:
> > The original announcement said that Fedora is already using upstart.
> > AFAIK Fedora is also commited to using SELinux. Do they use a similar
> > patch? Can they help convincing upstream?
>
> In terms of the
Petter Reinholdtsen (07/09/2009):
> I guess we were a bit unclear. The point is to use it for upgrades
> (ie when it exist), while not installing /etc/inittab for new
> installs, thus slowly getting rid of the file while ensuring the
> switch do not affect upgrades negatively. :)
I guess you mis
On Monday 07 September 2009 20:27:24 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Sep 2009, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le lundi 07 septembre 2009 à 08:39 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen a
écrit :
> > > I guess we were a bit unclear. The point is to use it for
> > > upgrades (ie when it exist), whi
On Mon, 07 Sep 2009, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le lundi 07 septembre 2009 à 08:39 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen a écrit :
> > I guess we were a bit unclear. The point is to use it for upgrades
> > (ie when it exist), while not installing /etc/inittab for new
> > installs, thus slowly getting rid of
On Mon, Sep 07 2009, Gabor Gombas wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 06:21:33PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
>> Right. I did not copy the upstream. I also think that we have
>> invested a lot of effort in Debian in order to make Squeeze SELinux
>> compliant, and make it so that
Le lundi 07 septembre 2009 à 08:39 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen a écrit :
> I guess we were a bit unclear. The point is to use it for upgrades
> (ie when it exist), while not installing /etc/inittab for new
> installs, thus slowly getting rid of the file while ensuring the
> switch do not affect up
[Rene Mayrhofer]
> Please don't. As you correctly pointed out, the current Debian init
> architecture is one of the most painful and outdated (not to say
> broken) parts in the whole system. It's really time to move away
> from old cruft (and I consider inittab to be cruft of little use at
> this t
Hi,
On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 06:21:33PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Right. I did not copy the upstream. I also think that we have
> invested a lot of effort in Debian in order to make Squeeze SELinux
> compliant, and make it so that turning on SELinux is fairly easy. I
> have asked
[Please CC me in replies, I am currently not subscribed to -devel].
On Saturday 05 September 2009 01:21:00 pm Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> The plan is to
> change upstart to actually use /etc/inittab, to ease the switch
> between sysvinit and upstart.
Please don't. As you correctly pointed out,
On Sun, Sep 06 2009, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> Isn't it a dupli of #543420
True, I should have checked.
> where the maintainer claims upstream doesn't want such a patch ?
Right. I did not copy the upstream. I also think that we have
invested a lot of effort in Debian in order to
On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 10:52:22AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 06:40:44PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 12:04:33PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > > On Sep 06, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> > > > > When should maintainers start adding upstart jobs
On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 06:40:44PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 12:04:33PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > On Sep 06, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > > When should maintainers start adding upstart jobs to their packages?
> > > Not before the upstart compat package that provi
On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 12:04:33PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Sep 06, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > When should maintainers start adding upstart jobs to their packages?
> > Not before the upstart compat package that provides upstart-job for
> > sysvinit-based systems is available.
> Is this re
On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 01:45:35AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Package: upstart
> Severity: wishlist
> Version: 0.6.3
> Tags: patch
>
> On Sat, Sep 05 2009, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
> diff --git upstart-0.6.3.orig/debian/changelog upstart-0.6.3/debian/changelog
> index be2b21f..afaf59a 1006
On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 12:04:33PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Sep 06, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> > > When should maintainers start adding upstart jobs to their packages?
> > Not before the upstart compat package that provides upstart-job for
> > sysvinit-based systems is available.
> Is this
On Sep 06, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > When should maintainers start adding upstart jobs to their packages?
> Not before the upstart compat package that provides upstart-job for
> sysvinit-based systems is available.
Is this relevant for Linux-specific packages as well? I.e., do we want
to continue
On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 04:43:57AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Great news. I really look forward to converting my init scripts to
> native upstart jobs, but I believe that some clarifications are needed
> about the long-term impact of switching to upstart.
> Can you clarify what normal packages w
Package: upstart
Severity: wishlist
Version: 0.6.3
Tags: patch
On Sat, Sep 05 2009, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> One of the features missing in upstart that is present in
> sysvinit is that the latter loads SELinux security policy early in the
> boot sequence, and the former does not (plea
Quoting mli...@stacktrace.us (mli...@stacktrace.us):
> Could someone please point me to a discussion on the pros and cons of upstart
> that was not funded by that spacecowboy shuttleworth?
I see absolutely zero point in throwing out partly aggressive remarks
in this thread.
Scott, who initiate
Great news. I really look forward to converting my init scripts to
native upstart jobs, but I believe that some clarifications are needed
about the long-term impact of switching to upstart.
Can you clarify what normal packages will have to do to support the
non-Linux ports which are unable to run
[mli...@stacktrace.us]
> Could someone please point me to a discussion on the pros and cons
> of upstart that was not funded by that spacecowboy shuttleworth?
No idea who funded the work, but some Fedora notes can be found via
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FCNewInit>. Fedora have already
switche
Could someone please point me to a discussion on the pros and cons of upstart
that was not funded by that spacecowboy shuttleworth?
Michael Biebl wrote:
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
The future of the boot system in Debian
===
[..]
The planned time frame
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> The future of the boot system in Debian
> ===
[..]
>
> The planned time frame for this is to replace /sbin/init with upstart
> for Squeeze, and see if we manage to change the very early boot to
[..]
> Petter
Hi,
One of the features missing in upstart that is present in
sysvinit is that the latter loads SELinux security policy early in the
boot sequence, and the former does not (please correct me if this is not
the case). I would be happy to help integrate selinux into upstart,
if that is
30 matches
Mail list logo
