Michał Górny posted on Tue, 16 Feb 2016 23:16:41 +0100 as excerpted:
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 20:57:31 +0100 Patrick Lauer
> wrote:
>
>> On 02/16/2016 08:33 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> > This all is going into some bickering nonsense and noise made by
>> > systemd haters just to feed their troll, FU
Francesco Riosa posted on Mon, 15 Feb 2016 13:13:37 +0100 as excerpted:
> Neither this is totally true, or put another way, everybody which is NOT
> using systemd is using eudev (or some form of static /dev).
> So obviously this is totally relevant for people that don't use systemd.
Not really tr
On 02/10/2016 20:15, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> On 10/02/16 12:09 PM, Brian Dolbec wrote:
>> On Wed, 10 Feb 2016 10:26:12 -0600 William Hubbs
>> wrote:
>
>
Often the decision to procrastinate is a decision that is
rewarded. That should be considered carefully.
>>>
>>> + 1.
>>>
>>> I
Nicolas Sebrecht posted on Thu, 11 Feb 2016 02:46:33 +0100 as excerpted:
> On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 11:00:15AM -0500, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>
>> Oh, eudev also doesn't handle network link setup given that external
>> tools already do this just fine. That's another difference, though not
>> one
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 02/10/2016 05:15 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> On 10/02/16 12:09 PM, Brian Dolbec wrote:
>> On Wed, 10 Feb 2016 10:26:12 -0600 William Hubbs
>> wrote:
>
>
Often the decision to procrastinate is a decision that is
rewarded. That shou
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 10/02/16 12:09 PM, Brian Dolbec wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Feb 2016 10:26:12 -0600 William Hubbs
> wrote:
>
>
>>> Often the decision to procrastinate is a decision that is
>>> rewarded. That should be considered carefully.
>>
>> + 1.
>>
>> I als
On Wed, 10 Feb 2016 09:27:50 -0500
waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 12:09:58AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote
> > On 09 Feb 2016 22:39, Duncan wrote:
> > > the way we're running udev is strongly
> > > discouraged and generally not supported by upstream, with a
> > > statement
On Wed, 10 Feb 2016 10:26:12 -0600
William Hubbs wrote:
> > Often the decision to procrastinate is a decision that is rewarded.
> > That should be considered carefully.
>
> + 1.
>
> I also saw another issue that made me shudder. If we change the
> default to eudev, people who are running
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 09:52:29AM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 9:27 AM, wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 12:09:58AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote
> >> On 09 Feb 2016 22:39, Duncan wrote:
> >> > Mike Frysinger posted on Tue, 09 Feb 2016 14:26:52 -0500 as excerpted:
> >> >
Dnia 10 lutego 2016 15:27:50 CET, waltd...@waltdnes.org napisał(a):
>On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 12:09:58AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote
>> On 09 Feb 2016 22:39, Duncan wrote:
>> > Mike Frysinger posted on Tue, 09 Feb 2016 14:26:52 -0500 as
>excerpted:
>> > > On 08 Feb 2016 13:46, Micha?? Górny wrote:
>
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 9:27 AM, wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 12:09:58AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote
>> On 09 Feb 2016 22:39, Duncan wrote:
>> > Mike Frysinger posted on Tue, 09 Feb 2016 14:26:52 -0500 as excerpted:
>> > > On 08 Feb 2016 13:46, Micha?? Górny wrote:
>> > >> I'm strongly agains
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 12:09:58AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote
> On 09 Feb 2016 22:39, Duncan wrote:
> > Mike Frysinger posted on Tue, 09 Feb 2016 14:26:52 -0500 as excerpted:
> > > On 08 Feb 2016 13:46, Micha?? Górny wrote:
> > >> I'm strongly against this, because:
> > >
> > > agreed. i also do
On 09 Feb 2016 22:39, Duncan wrote:
> Mike Frysinger posted on Tue, 09 Feb 2016 14:26:52 -0500 as excerpted:
> > On 08 Feb 2016 13:46, Michał Górny wrote:
> >> I'm strongly against this, because:
> >
> > agreed. i also don't see any reasons in Patrick's e-mail to suggest the
> > current default i
Rich Freeman posted on Tue, 09 Feb 2016 13:29:04 -0500 as excerpted:
> This isn't holding back systemd, and doesn't really have anything to do
> with systemd at all.
/Now/ you and I (both systemd users) are on the same page, here. =:^)
The outcome of this debate isn't going to affect systemd use
Daniel Campbell posted on Tue, 09 Feb 2016 06:44:34 -0800 as excerpted:
> If anything, a developer will have more control over how their daemon
> is handled in the rc script. They would have to read systemd's C code
> or its plethora of unit options to set it up 'just right' to achieve
> the same.
On 09/02/16 23:38, Alex McWhirter wrote:
> On 02/09/2016 05:39 PM, Duncan wrote:
>> I'd agree, except that the way we're running udev is strongly discouraged
>> and generally not supported by upstream, with a statement that it /will/
>> break in the future, it's simply a matter of time.
>>
>> Wh
On 02/09/2016 05:39 PM, Duncan wrote:
> I'd agree, except that the way we're running udev is strongly discouraged
> and generally not supported by upstream, with a statement that it /will/
> break in the future, it's simply a matter of time.
>
> Which makes a big difference when supporting that
Mike Frysinger posted on Tue, 09 Feb 2016 14:26:52 -0500 as excerpted:
> On 08 Feb 2016 13:46, Michał Górny wrote:
>> I'm strongly against this, because:
>
> agreed. i also don't see any reasons in Patrick's e-mail to suggest the
> current default is inadequate. "i don't like upstream" isn't re
On 2/8/16 7:47 PM, Duncan wrote:
> Michał Górny posted on Mon, 08 Feb 2016 13:46:06 +0100 as excerpted:
>
>> 4. eudev is underdocumented, and the maintainer admits that 'he sucks at
>> documenting'. In fact, did anyone even bother to note how far eudev
>> diverges from upstream udev to this point?
Michał Górny posted on Mon, 08 Feb 2016 13:46:06 +0100 as excerpted:
> 4. eudev is underdocumented, and the maintainer admits that 'he sucks at
> documenting'. In fact, did anyone even bother to note how far eudev
> diverges from upstream udev to this point?
IMO that's the most important of the f
20 matches
Mail list logo
