Hi,
Am 2018-05-08 hackte to...@tuxteam.de in die Tasten:
> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 08:49:00PM +0300, Michelle Konzack wrote:
>> Without security updates...
>>
>> I used some to get rid of systemd entirely, BUT,
>> those packages are some versions behind Debian!
>
> This is to be expected: keeping
On 08/05/18 04:52, songbird wrote:
> David Griffith wrote:
> ...
>> I found someone who has already done most if not all of this analysis and =
>> has set up a repo containing non-systemd-using packages=2E Perhaps this ca=
>> n be used as a foundation for something official=2E
>
> devuan is a
On 2018-05-07 at 14:34, Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:
> On Mon, 07 May 2018 07:39:22 -0400 The Wanderer said:
>
>> 3. See whether it tries to install systemd, either by direct
>> dependency or by an indirect cascade of dependencies.
> ...
>> 5. If it tries to install systemd by indirect dependency,
On Mon, 7 May 2018, Brian wrote:
[snip notes on analysing each and every systemd-touching package]
I found someone who has already done most if not all of this analysis
and has set up a repo containing non-systemd-using packages. Perhaps
this can be used as a foundation for something official.
David Griffith wrote:
...
> I found someone who has already done most if not all of this analysis and =
> has set up a repo containing non-systemd-using packages=2E Perhaps this ca=
> n be used as a foundation for something official=2E
devuan is already there (is it not?)...
songbird
On Mon 07 May 2018 at 05:50:27 -0700, David Griffith wrote:
> On May 7, 2018 4:39:22 AM PDT, The Wanderer wrote:
> >On 2018-05-06 at 21:47, David Griffith wrote:
> >
> >> Could we start the process of identifying packages that have
> >> dependencies on systemd in some way that is are not actually
On Mon, 07 May 2018 07:39:22 -0400 The Wanderer said:
> 3. See whether it tries to install systemd, either by direct dependency
> or by an indirect cascade of dependencies.
...
> 5. If it tries to install systemd by indirect dependency, identify the
> package in the dependency chain which results
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 08:49:00PM +0300, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Good evening,
>
> Am 2018-05-07 hackte to...@tuxteam.de in die Tasten:
> > If "no systemd" purism is your thing, there's Devuan. There are
> > pretty smart folks over there too.
>
>
Good evening,
Am 2018-05-07 hackte to...@tuxteam.de in die Tasten:
> If "no systemd" purism is your thing, there's Devuan. There are
> pretty smart folks over there too.
Without security updates...
I used some to get rid of systemd entirely, BUT,
those packages are some versions behind Debian!
On May 7, 2018 4:39:22 AM PDT, The Wanderer wrote:
>On 2018-05-06 at 21:47, David Griffith wrote:
>
>> Could we start the process of identifying packages that have
>> dependencies on systemd in some way that is are not actually
>> required?
>
>This is a seriously nontrivial task.
>
>As I understan
On 2018-05-06 at 21:47, David Griffith wrote:
> Could we start the process of identifying packages that have
> dependencies on systemd in some way that is are not actually
> required?
This is a seriously nontrivial task.
As I understand matters, the only sure way to do it would be something like
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 08:15:41AM +, David Griffith wrote:
> On Mon, 7 May 2018, Andy Smith wrote:
>
> >Hi David,
> >
> >On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 06:32:16AM +, David Griffith wrote:
> >>How many packages are there that could possibly need to b
On Mon, 7 May 2018, Andy Smith wrote:
Hi David,
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 06:32:16AM +, David Griffith wrote:
How many packages are there that could possibly need to be linked against
systemd?
Are you going to provide us with any examples of packages you think
are needlessly linked against
Hi David,
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 06:32:16AM +, David Griffith wrote:
> How many packages are there that could possibly need to be linked against
> systemd?
Are you going to provide us with any examples of packages you think
are needlessly linked against systemd? I expect there are some, but
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 06:32:16AM +, David Griffith wrote:
> On Mon, 7 May 2018, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
[...]
> How many packages are there that could possibly need to be linked
> against systemd?
I don't know what your question has to do with
On Mon, 7 May 2018, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 01:47:51AM +, David Griffith wrote:
Could we start the process of identifying packages that have
dependencies on systemd in some way that is are not actually
required?
David
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 01:47:51AM +, David Griffith wrote:
>
> Could we start the process of identifying packages that have
> dependencies on systemd in some way that is are not actually
> required?
David,
I understand your concerns. I, myself
Hello,
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 01:47:51AM +, David Griffith wrote:
> Could we start the process of identifying packages that have dependencies on
> systemd in some way that is are not actually required?
Nothing has been stopping anyone from doing this since the day the
first package in Debian
18 matches
Mail list logo
