On Tue, 2014-06-10 at 17:35 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-06-10 at 19:15 +0400, Reco wrote:
> > So, maybe 'merged' is a wrong word to describe udev-systemd
> > relationship. But it fits.
Perhaps "merged" indeed is a bad term, it is merged by the upstream's
source tree, but it still is
On Tue, 2014-06-10 at 19:15 +0400, Reco wrote:
> So, maybe 'merged' is a wrong word to describe udev-systemd
> relationship. But it fits.
All of your points IMO are "true". Nobody, neither me, mentions that
currently it is impossible to use udev without caring (too much) about
systemd.
IIUC Reco
On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 23:17:50 +1200
Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 09:56:15AM +0400, Reco wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 17:48:37 +1200
> > Chris Bannister wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 08:31:34PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > > >
> > > > In this case "systemd" like
On Tue, 2014-06-10 at 23:20 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 08:22:51AM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 17:48 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 08:31:34PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > > >
> > > > In this case "systemd" likely
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 08:22:51AM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 17:48 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 08:31:34PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > >
> > > In this case "systemd" likely is for udev, wich usually also is used
> > > without systemd, but it
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 09:56:15AM +0400, Reco wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 17:48:37 +1200
> Chris Bannister wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 08:31:34PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > >
> > > In this case "systemd" likely is for udev, wich usually also is used
> > > without systemd, but it's
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Reco wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 09:01:24AM -0400, Tom H wrote:
>>> Allow me to remind you this story:
>>>
>>> http://lkml.org/lkml/2012/10/3/484
>>>
>>> The whole mess started once udev (systemd) upstream took the liberty to
>>> rewrite udev's firmware loader
On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 03:14:27 +1200
Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 02:56:53PM +0400, Reco wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 01:31:26PM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > > Quote from the first link:
> > >
> > > The udev built from the systemd source tree will stay compatible
On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 17:35 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> I'm using systemd for my everyday Linux since years
To be more precise, for my Arch that was stable until a few days ago, I
at least use systemd, from <= to >=:
[rocketmouse@archlinux ~]$ grep systemd /var/log/pacman.log
[snip]
[2013-02-17
On Mon, 09 Jun 2014 17:35:01 +0200
Bernard Mardorf wrote:
> spread FUD, it's a fact that udev is merged with udev. So what's
Oh, I thought it was merged with udev ;-)
--
I farted and scared my cat.
moments like that make me better feel my own power...
signature.asc
Description: PGP signatu
On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 17:35 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> udev is merged with udev
^ systemd
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/
On Tue, 2014-06-10 at 03:14 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 02:56:53PM +0400, Reco wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 01:31:26PM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > > Quote from the first link:
> > >
> > > The udev built from the systemd source tree will stay compatible
>
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 02:56:53PM +0400, Reco wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 01:31:26PM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > Quote from the first link:
> >
> > The udev built from the systemd source tree will stay compatible
> > with non-systemd init systems for a long time. This change is
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 09:01:24AM -0400, Tom H wrote:
> > Allow me to remind you this story:
> >
> > http://lkml.org/lkml/2012/10/3/484
> >
> > The whole mess started once udev (systemd) upstream took the liberty to
> > rewrite udev's firmware loader, and blamed kernel for the resulting
> > breaka
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 6:56 AM, Reco wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 01:31:26PM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
>> Quote from the first link:
>>
>> The udev built from the systemd source tree will stay compatible
>> with non-systemd init systems for a long time. This change is mostly
>> a detail of
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 01:31:26PM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> Quote from the first link:
>
> The udev built from the systemd source tree will stay compatible
> with non-systemd init systems for a long time. This change is mostly
> a detail of the build scheme, rather than a chang
On Lu, 09 iun 14, 08:22:51, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 17:48 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 08:31:34PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > >
> > > In this case "systemd" likely is for udev, wich usually also is used
> > > without systemd, but it's merged by u
On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 17:48 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 08:31:34PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> >
> > In this case "systemd" likely is for udev, wich usually also is used
> > without systemd, but it's merged by upstream. Just a guess
>
> NO it isn't merged!!! Please st
On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 17:48:37 +1200
Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 08:31:34PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> >
> > In this case "systemd" likely is for udev, wich usually also is used
> > without systemd, but it's merged by upstream. Just a guess
>
> NO it isn't merged!!! Please s
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 08:31:34PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>
> In this case "systemd" likely is for udev, wich usually also is used
> without systemd, but it's merged by upstream. Just a guess
NO it isn't merged!!! Please stop spreading FUD!
--
"If you're not careful, the newspapers will hav
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 07/06/2014 12:05, David Dušanić a écrit :
>
>
> 06.06.2014, 10:56, "François Patte"
> :
>> Le 06/06/2014 10:29, David Dušanić a écrit :
>>> 05.06.2014, 15:28, "François Patte"
>>> :
Bonjour,
Since last upgrade, I cannot mount (or
06.06.2014, 10:56, "François Patte" :
> Le 06/06/2014 10:29, David Dušanić a écrit :
>> 05.06.2014, 15:28, "François Patte"
>> :
>>> Bonjour,
>>>
>>> Since last upgrade, I cannot mount (or umount) any removable
>>> media under xfce4:
>>>
>>> I can see the icon on the desktop, mouse over ind
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 05/06/2014 15:28, François Patte a écrit :
> Bonjour,
>
> Since last upgrade, I cannot mount (or umount) any removable media
> under xfce4:
>
> I can see the icon on the desktop, mouse over indicates that the
> media is not mounted and if I ask (
On Fri, 2014-06-06 at 10:56 +0200, François Patte wrote:
> Le 06/06/2014 10:29, David Dušanić a écrit :
> > 05.06.2014, 15:28, "François Patte"
> > :
> >> Bonjour,
> >>
> >> Since last upgrade, I cannot mount (or umount) any removable
> >> media under xfce4:
> >>
> >> I can see the icon on the d
Ahoj,
Dňa Fri, 06 Jun 2014 10:56:50 +0200 François Patte
napísal:
> Problems are more important than I said first:
>
> 1- xfce4 systematically records my sessions when I logout and I don't
> want it does
Yes, for me too. I have in my ~/.xsessionrc:
rm -fr ~/.cache/session
and i am using
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 06/06/2014 10:29, David Dušanić a écrit :
> 05.06.2014, 15:28, "François Patte"
> :
>> Bonjour,
>>
>> Since last upgrade, I cannot mount (or umount) any removable
>> media under xfce4:
>>
>> I can see the icon on the desktop, mouse over indicates
05.06.2014, 15:28, "François Patte" :
> Bonjour,
>
> Since last upgrade, I cannot mount (or umount) any removable media
> under xfce4:
>
> I can see the icon on the desktop, mouse over indicates that the media
> is not mounted and if I ask (mouse left click) to mount them the
> answer is: not autho
Ahoj,
Dňa Fri, 6 Jun 2014 02:32:19 +0800 Bret Busby
napísal:
> On 05/06/2014, Gour wrote:
> > François Patte writes:
> >
> >> Since last upgrade, I cannot mount (or umount) any removable media
> >> under xfce4:
> >>
> >> I can see the icon on the desktop, mouse over indicates that the
> >> med
On 05/06/2014, Gour wrote:
> François Patte writes:
>
>> Since last upgrade, I cannot mount (or umount) any removable media
>> under xfce4:
>>
>> I can see the icon on the desktop, mouse over indicates that the media
>> is not mounted and if I ask (mouse left click) to mount them the
>> answer is
François Patte writes:
> Since last upgrade, I cannot mount (or umount) any removable media
> under xfce4:
>
> I can see the icon on the desktop, mouse over indicates that the media
> is not mounted and if I ask (mouse left click) to mount them the
> answer is: not authorized operation
Ohh,
30 matches
Mail list logo
