On 14Sep21:2227+0100, Brian wrote:
> On Sun 21 Sep 2014 at 16:29:53 -0400, David L. Craig wrote:
>
> > On 14Sep21:1827+0100, Brian wrote:
> >
> > > Apart from using a Beta 1 D-I i386 netinst and installing to a real
> > > machine I did the same as you a couple of days ago. No problems
> > > upgra
On Sun 21 Sep 2014 at 16:29:53 -0400, David L. Craig wrote:
> On 14Sep21:1827+0100, Brian wrote:
>
> > Apart from using a Beta 1 D-I i386 netinst and installing to a real
> > machine I did the same as you a couple of days ago. No problems
> > upgrading to unstable. Far be it for me to suggest any
On 14Sep21:1827+0100, Brian wrote:
> Apart from using a Beta 1 D-I i386 netinst and installing to a real
> machine I did the same as you a couple of days ago. No problems
> upgrading to unstable. Far be it for me to suggest any bugs in qemu
> or kvm, but we do have quite a difference in our experi
David Baron writes:
> Aside from that, systemd works great, is lightening-fast, had no problems
> with
> it! So why all the fuss.
That an init system is being replaced is not even scratching the surface
of the issue, partly because of issues the init system intended to
replace the existing one
On Sun 21 Sep 2014 at 12:16:44 -0400, David L. Craig wrote:
> On 14Sep21:1618+0100, Brian wrote:
> > On Sun 21 Sep 2014 at 09:47:32 -0400, David L. Craig wrote:
> >
> > You didn't accept an upgrade to the new default init system. But you
> > accepted the new sysvinit package.
>
> Yes, after syst
On 14Sep21:1618+0100, Brian wrote:
> On Sun 21 Sep 2014 at 09:47:32 -0400, David L. Craig wrote:
>
> You didn't accept an upgrade to the new default init system. But you
> accepted the new sysvinit package.
Yes, after systemd broke the system as described in
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugrep
On 14Sep21:1544+0100, Martin Read wrote:
> Shorter, but incorrect and unsafe. On Debian jessie and later (and thus, by
> extension, the current state of Debian sid), /sbin/init means "the currently
> installed default init system". As such, it is not the correct way to set up
> a fallback configur
On Sun 21 Sep 2014 at 09:47:32 -0400, David L. Craig wrote:
> On 14Sep21:1604+0300, David Baron wrote:
> >
> > And if a
> > boot command "init=/lib/sysvinit/init" will definitely yield a fallback
> > (have
> > it in my lilo.conf but have not actually needed to tried it), then maybe
> > this
On 21/09/14 14:47, David L. Craig wrote:
Well, do your due dilligence. On my primary Sid system,
so far, so good:
# dpkg -S /lib/sysvinit/init
sysvinit: /lib/sysvinit/init
# dpkg -S /sbin/init
sysvinit-core: /sbin/init
# cmp /lib/sysvinit/init /sbin/init
This only needs to be checked after mai
On 14Sep21:1604+0300, David Baron wrote:
>
> And if a
> boot command "init=/lib/sysvinit/init" will definitely yield a fallback (have
> it in my lilo.conf but have not actually needed to tried it), then maybe this
> can be laid to rest.
Well, do your due dilligence. On my primary Sid system,
Seems to be dominating a good part of the list traffic.
Personal history: I never had qualms about upgrading the old sysv stuff. If
something did not work, it was some script which I could a least try to fix.
The whole init sequence was RUNPARTS off various run-level directories
containing appr
11 matches
Mail list logo
