[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: so, systemd now and teh world still turns...


On Mittwoch, 4. Juni 2014, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> > thanks for taking this to the list and for doing some further
> > investigations. That's quite among the best possible outcomes of that
> > blog post of mine ;-)
> Just wait until the press get hold of it...

shrugs. As long as it resulted in one meaningful discussion, I'm happy. The 
press will do its job anyway, some good, some better, some lousy.
> > piuparts has not gotten this far with testing yet (other depends of these
> > packages are probably in the failed testing state), but I have added
> > those to my list.
> I didn't realise piuparts was such a slow-running batch job;  I'd
> imagined it as something that tests new packages in real-time like
> lintian, or dependency sets of the whole archive within minutes like
> dose/edos-debcheck.

No, piuparts tests packages. And if it package is buggy it wont test packages 
which depend on this buggy package as it's very hard to decide where the kind 
of buggyness piuparts detects comes from.

piuparts.d.o aint slow anymore, since quite some time :)
> It would seem to be due to gnome-session, but there are OR'd
> dependencies on other providers of x-session-manager such as
> xfce4-session.  So this actually works in sid, without needing systemd
> or systemd-sysv:
> apt-get  --no-install-recommends \
>  install ltsp-server-standalone xfce4-session

For the piuparts usecase I dont really care about these cornercase. And yes, 
surele its a valid wishlist bug to test alternative dependency pathes.
> I didn't think you'd be telling lies on purpose, but let's not overstate
> the extent of systemd's tentacles yet.

Are you implying that I could be telling lies because I was brainwashed by the 
systemd tentacles? Many years ago there was this cabal conspirancy in Debian, 
it seems a bit like some cabal conspirancy is back: the systemd cabal, 
secretly or not so secretly ruling and dictating the linux^wunix world. "Stand 
up before its too late." - this really explains a lot of the traffic. 
> > well, to me the current question here is how much is "xfswitch-plugin"
> > essential part of XFCE?
> It's only optional.  It's a Suggests: of package xfce4-goodies, and that
> is a Recommends: of xfce4.  This is why I was able to `apt-get install
> --no-install-recommends` either xfce4 or task-xfce-desktop

Sure (thats a nice thing). But that wasnt really my question: is xfswitch-
plugin considered to be part of XFCE? IOW: is XFCE without that package 
working, but with less features than one would expect from XFCE?

XFCE without mutt is XFCE as it was intended. XFCE without this plugin?

> To check there were no systemd dependencies, I had systemd-must-die
> metapackage installed and held ;)

That's actually not my interest here: Debian has decided to choose systemd as 
the default init system for jessie and I want to contribute to it being a good 
default for all major desktops.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: