Originally posted by gens
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Don't Use Fedora's Fedup Right Now Due To A Bug With Systemd
Collapse
X
-
N
-
Originally posted by pal666 View PostFor the n-th time: there are good reasons, but some people have too small brains to understand it. and when some other software depends on systemd it is not a systemd's fault. it is a fault either of that software or of shitty systemd alternatives
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by asdfblah View PostFor the n-th time: the problem is not systemd as an alternative, quite the contrary. The problem is that systemd is forcing people to use systemd through dependencies, leaving any alternatives on their own, for no good reason (other than "my feels" and "my innovation").
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by asdfblah View PostFor the n-th time: the problem is not systemd as an alternative, quite the contrary. The problem is that systemd is forcing people to use systemd through dependencies, leaving any alternatives on their own, for no good reason (other than "my feels" and "my innovation").
Of course alpha software is dangerous, but how would you solve a problem that is considered a "feature"? Also, you should tell Arch users that their whole distro is dangerous
The purpose of the alpha release is to find the problems before the final release is out. Blame the developers because there is a bug in the alpha software is ridiculous: they exists exactly for that purpose.
The real problem is how you should test the software?
Who want to help in testing should not mix the production release with alpha release. It depends on what you want to test, but in general you should have a dedicated partition for that purpose, or to use an ISO, or install the alpha software in another place (as per LibreOffice, the alpha release are co-installable with the production release), but you should *not* put yourself in the condition to break your production system because of the test.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by gens View Postand here is an honest answer
i had debian jessie with xfce on a laptop and i removed networkmanager and its gtk applet
couple days later i wanted to put it back
installing nm-applet pulled in networkmanager, but it also pulled in gnome3 and systemd
i'm sure there is some logic behind it doing that, but what happened is just stupid
We merged libsystemd-journal.so, libsystemd-id128.so, libsystemd-login
and libsystemd-daemon into a a single libsystemd.so to reduce code
duplication and avoid cyclic dependencies (see below). The new library
exports the same symbols as the old libraries, however with a different
symbol version. If "--enable-compat-libs" is specified while building
systemd you will get a set of compatibility libraries built that simply
map the old library calls to the new library. This is provided only to
ease the transition, please don't forget to pass "--disable-compat-libs"
(which is the default) after your distribution completed the
transition. Sorry for the complexities this involves!Last edited by dungeon; 02 November 2014, 06:40 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by doom_Oo7 View PostThis is because the dependencies in Debian are retarded. The policy is "enable all features by default", which causes massive pulls every time you want to install something.
Today I wanted to install gnome-calculator from LXDE, the little bastard wanted to pull no less than 300megabytes of deps...
Code:APT::Install-Recommends "0"; APT::Install-Suggests "0";
Last edited by dungeon; 02 November 2014, 05:27 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Delgarde View PostFrom what I gather from the linked blog and bugzilla discussions, it *can* be disabled through a config file option. It's hard to get a clear picture, but it sounds like this is essentially a distribution bug - an interaction between a new systemd feature and a long-running on-boot process, which could easily have been addressed with that config option, if anyone had anticipated the problem before it caused problems.
Unfortunately, it's the usual "20/20 hindsight" thing, so they're having to clean up a problem that snuck through...
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by mpppp View PostThe showstopper, anyway, is that this behavior can't be disabled, or the booting period extended, by editing a config file.
Unfortunately, it's the usual "20/20 hindsight" thing, so they're having to clean up a problem that snuck through...
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: