Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Bug#675175: Packaging?
1 view
Skip to first unread message
Matthias Urlichs
Jan 9, 2013, 6:40:01 PM1/9/13
to
So, *has* somebody created a Debian package with systemd-19x (current
version is -197) yet?
If so, please submit to Experimental.
Thanks.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
version is -197) yet?
If so, please submit to Experimental.
Thanks.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Marco d'Itri
Jan 9, 2013, 7:00:02 PM1/9/13
to
On Jan 10, Michael Biebl <bi...@debian.org> wrote:
> I.e. we need to talk to Marco how we are going to handle systemd+udev
> (shared git repo, packaging tools, etc).
I expect that there will be a big talk about the future Debian init
system just after the release.
--
ciao,
Marco
> I.e. we need to talk to Marco how we are going to handle systemd+udev
> (shared git repo, packaging tools, etc).
I expect that there will be a big talk about the future Debian init
system just after the release.
--
ciao,
Marco
Michael Biebl
Jan 9, 2013, 7:00:02 PM1/9/13
to
On 09.01.2013 23:59, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> So, *has* somebody created a Debian package with systemd-19x (current
> version is -197) yet?
>
> If so, please submit to Experimental.
I've done some preliminary packages for 195 [1] but the udev bits are
> So, *has* somebody created a Debian package with systemd-19x (current
> version is -197) yet?
>
> If so, please submit to Experimental.
not working yet.
More important then the actual packaging work is how we deal with the
merged udev + systemd maintainership.
I.e. we need to talk to Marco how we are going to handle systemd+udev
(shared git repo, packaging tools, etc).
Michael
(shared git repo, packaging tools, etc).
[1] http://people.debian.org/~biebl/systemd-195/
--
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?
Marco d'Itri
Jan 9, 2013, 7:30:01 PM1/9/13
to
> I think we can decouple the init discussion from udev, since we can
> certainly continue to ship udev as a separate binary package which
> doesn't have any dependencies on systemd.
My position is that we need to have exactly one init system in Debian.
I am not sure yet about which one it should be, but if it will not be
systemd then I see no place in Debian for it.
So I would rather not spend time discussing something which may never
happen. Does anybody want to organize a Debian-init meeting at FOSDEM?
--
ciao,
Marco
> certainly continue to ship udev as a separate binary package which
> doesn't have any dependencies on systemd.
My position is that we need to have exactly one init system in Debian.
I am not sure yet about which one it should be, but if it will not be
systemd then I see no place in Debian for it.
So I would rather not spend time discussing something which may never
happen. Does anybody want to organize a Debian-init meeting at FOSDEM?
--
ciao,
Marco
Michael Biebl
Jan 9, 2013, 7:30:02 PM1/9/13
to
I think we can decouple the init discussion from udev, since we can
certainly continue to ship udev as a separate binary package which
doesn't have any dependencies on systemd.
Unless you plan to ship udev as part of the systemd binary package?
certainly continue to ship udev as a separate binary package which
doesn't have any dependencies on systemd.
As for co-maintainenance of systemd+udev we need decide where and how we
are going to maintain the combined work.
Right now the systemd repo is at [1] using gitpkg, dh and dh_install.
Marco, your workflow is quite different, so I guess we need to find some
common ground if we are going to work as a team on this.
Michael
[1] http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-systemd/systemd.git;a=summary
Tollef Fog Heen
Jan 10, 2013, 2:20:02 AM1/10/13
to
]] Marco d'Itri
Hi,
> On Jan 10, Michael Biebl <bi...@debian.org> wrote:
>
> > I think we can decouple the init discussion from udev, since we can
> > certainly continue to ship udev as a separate binary package which
> > doesn't have any dependencies on systemd.
>
> My position is that we need to have exactly one init system in
> Debian. I am not sure yet about which one it should be, but if it will
> not be systemd then I see no place in Debian for it.
At least in the short term, that's not going to happen. Wheezy will
ship with two or three, jessie is likely to ship with more than one too.
> So I would rather not spend time discussing something which may never
> happen. Does anybody want to organize a Debian-init meeting at FOSDEM?
I'll be happy to meet up at FOSDEM. I guess we'll just have to find a
corner somewhere and discuss about it.
Michael, are you planning on going to FOSDEM?
--
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are
Hi,
> On Jan 10, Michael Biebl <bi...@debian.org> wrote:
>
> > I think we can decouple the init discussion from udev, since we can
> > certainly continue to ship udev as a separate binary package which
> > doesn't have any dependencies on systemd.
>
> My position is that we need to have exactly one init system in
> Debian. I am not sure yet about which one it should be, but if it will
> not be systemd then I see no place in Debian for it.
ship with two or three, jessie is likely to ship with more than one too.
> So I would rather not spend time discussing something which may never
> happen. Does anybody want to organize a Debian-init meeting at FOSDEM?
corner somewhere and discuss about it.
Michael, are you planning on going to FOSDEM?
--
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are
Matthias Urlichs
Jan 10, 2013, 7:00:02 AM1/10/13
to
Hi,
Marco d'Itri:
(Hurd, *BSD kernels) will have to derive their init scripts from systemd
unit files (if that is in fact chosen).
> I am not sure yet about which one it should be, but if it will not be
> systemd then I see no place in Debian for it.
I am, but this is not the right place for that discussion.
> So I would rather not spend time discussing something which may never
> happen. Does anybody want to organize a Debian-init meeting at FOSDEM?
>
Good idea.
I don't know whether I'll be able to attend yet, unfortunately.
--
-- Matthias Urlichs
Marco d'Itri:
> My position is that we need to have exactly one init system in Debian.
I'd amend that to "one _master_ init system", meaning that anything else
(Hurd, *BSD kernels) will have to derive their init scripts from systemd
unit files (if that is in fact chosen).
> I am not sure yet about which one it should be, but if it will not be
> systemd then I see no place in Debian for it.
> So I would rather not spend time discussing something which may never
> happen. Does anybody want to organize a Debian-init meeting at FOSDEM?
>
I don't know whether I'll be able to attend yet, unfortunately.
--
-- Matthias Urlichs
Michael Biebl
Jan 25, 2013, 12:00:02 PM1/25/13
to
Sorry for the late reply.
On 10.01.2013 08:14, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> ]] Marco d'Itri
>> So I would rather not spend time discussing something which may never
>> happen. Does anybody want to organize a Debian-init meeting at FOSDEM?
>
> I'll be happy to meet up at FOSDEM. I guess we'll just have to find a
> corner somewhere and discuss about it.
>
> Michael, are you planning on going to FOSDEM?
Yes, I'll be there and I definitely think we should meet. I'm new to
fosdem and it's proceedings. How can we get a room for a BOF/meeting?
Michael
On 10.01.2013 08:14, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> ]] Marco d'Itri
>> So I would rather not spend time discussing something which may never
>> happen. Does anybody want to organize a Debian-init meeting at FOSDEM?
>
> I'll be happy to meet up at FOSDEM. I guess we'll just have to find a
> corner somewhere and discuss about it.
>
> Michael, are you planning on going to FOSDEM?
fosdem and it's proceedings. How can we get a room for a BOF/meeting?
Michael
0 new messages