From: Cristian Rodríguez <crrodriguez(a)opensuse.org> To: opensuse(a)opensuse.org Subject: Re: [opensuse] systemd vs cups Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2013 18:54:46 -0300 El 08/10/13 18:18, Ruediger Meier escribió: Yes, exactly and while it still needs some love, it is correct. -----Original Message----- Ok, that systemd listens on 631 to check if cups needs to be started up. No problem with that, sounds reasonable enough But why does it still listens _after_ it did startup... Could very well be the internal mechanisms of systemd, but it look odd, (at least at first glance). Is that to be expected for all daemons that are started up (by systemd)? Hans -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

El 08/10/13 20:32, John Andersen escribió: Nope, that will defeat its purpose. the service in question (be cups or any other) is given the open descriptor to handle the request. -- "If debugging is the process of removing bugs, then programming must be the process of putting them in." - Edsger Dijkstra -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

Cristian Rodríguez wrote: Correct brehavior would be: SystemD listens on the cupsd port SystemD picks up activity on the cupsd port SystemD starts cupsd [optional short delay] SystemD relinquishes the cupsd port because now cupsd is listening. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

-----Original Message----- From: Cristian Rodríguez <crrodriguez(a)opensuse.org> To: opensuse(a)opensuse.org Subject: Re: [opensuse] systemd vs cups Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 01:08:27 -0300 El 08/10/13 23:49, Dirk Gently escribió: nope, it is doing exactly what it should, as designed and intented. otherwise it could not monitor, stop, perform any kind of operation if the socket fails.. or provide any kind of support for ordering other components after the socket goes down/up etc.. -----Original Message----- I thought along the same lines as Dirk.... If i got a (any) client-program, setting up an connection on 1.2.3.4::abcd who is answering the call? If i understood you correctly, systemd steals away all connection-setups How does i get to the intended service? Can you define priorities on ports? If systemd passes connection-request-setup towards an underlying daemon, fine, but in that case the daemon does not need also to be listening. So either one, but not both. I sincerely hope, that not _all_ traffic passes first through systemd before it arrives at the intended daemon...... Hans -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

On 04/15/2014 04:42 PM, Dirk Gently wrote: Bwahahaha! I had the same thought a long time ago! I had the thought that what better way would Microsoft have to bork Linux than to rot it with cancer from the inside? To turn it into a poor Windows imitation? Don't get me wrong, I have the greatest respect for the developers working on this, but there does seem to be a clash of paradigms going on. Regards, Lew -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

On Tue, 15 Apr 2014 21:25:37 -0300 Cristian Rodríguez <crrodriguez(a)opensuse.org> wrote: Subsonic jets vs the Concorde. Oh, wait.... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

John Andersen wrote: With his snotty attitude towards answering reasonable questions, it would serve him right if Linux revoked his commit privileges, too, like Kay Seivert's -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

El 15/04/14 21:22, Anton Aylward escribió: I suspect Dirk is trolling or is deluded by thinking any current mainstream OS works following the "unix principles" (whatever that means) -- Cristian "I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody." -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

Anton Aylward wrote: inet and xinet listen to a port, and when traffic comes in, start up the corresponding service, and hand-off the traffic to that service. SystemD tries to *BE* every freaking service.... Unix philosophy -- each program does one thing, and does that one thing VERY WELL. In contrast, SystemD tries to do EVERYTHING, and does NONE of it well -- which is straight out of the Microsoft/Windows way of doing things. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

Anton Aylward wrote: ---- There could be a perfectly good explanation why the design follows MS's serviced and why even the config files look like microsoft setup file (besides under the table payments). At the very least, linux is moving toward a locked-down appleian walled garden -- just as Windows is. Windows 8 *almost* required secureboot on any PC shipping windows. They did on everything BUT the PC platform. PC platform is in the near future. The idea is to be able to lock down people's PC's so corporations can sell you computer based services rather than sell you products. The economy is moving toward 'service based' rather than product based, because, as Adobe has found out, having to develop a product in order to get income is hard work. As PC's have become more complex, keeping programs working while releasing new features is becoming impossible. Many large companies are releasing SW as perpetual beta products while they see how they can sell related services. MS has been converting most of the business customers to contract support -- not sales of licenses. The newest version of office she has requires her computer be online in order to activate and requires running a full-time license and security daemon in the background. Stop the daemon (I mean stop, not disable), and office stops functioning. None of the components will start. The idea is to use the TPM to hold keys to verify the SW at boot time and maintain a trusted (by the corporations) software base. Users won't be able to run programs on their computers unless they are approved. They MIGHT be able to boot in an 'insecure' mode, but that will get old really fast.... basically think of the PC as becoming an expensive game and media playback console -- that you'll have to shell out for. Anton Aylward wrote: ---- Apache is a web server -- of course it wouldn't get out of the way. xinetd can apply controls to each TCP connection it manages. The problem comes in that there have always been some daemons/utilities that couldn't deal with that paradigm and need to do their own listening. Examples: apache -- does it relinquish it's ports to systemd? Samba, nfs, sendmail and many others. Cups *likely* doesn't need continuous connection to it's listening CPU port, but try that for samba or a busy webserver, and you are going to see performance degradation. Another problem with the monolith model -- in Win 7 MS moved all the large I/O's into their System(Daemon), where they cannot be monitored, limited or controlled. In fact, if you try to control regulate MS's systemd, by adjusting it's priority -- it will blue screen your system "for your protection" (what it says on the blue screen). Wonder how long it will be before the linux systemd does something similar. On a regular basis, MS's systemd will noticeably cause system performance problems -- and they justify it by having it linked into and controlling other needed services, leading to the next point: --- right -- are you saying systemd continue to sit in the middle and passes the traffic through itself? or does it spawn the child and hand off STDIN/OUT/ERR linked to the network socket and the child daemon then talks direct. If it is doing the latter, that's pretty much the way inetd and xinetd work. If it is going the former, that's an impending nightmare. ---- Well, first there was "sysVinit", then "syslog", then went "udevd", then went "powerd"., um... now it's taking out "xinetd/inetd". Also, only last week there as an exchange of systemd proponents asking for samba to "toe-the-line", as it seems to do things systemd doesn't expect (yet another daemon is now 'bad and wrong' because of systemd?) A few months back there was a lively exchange between RedHat and Linus as they pressured him to accept their trusted code into the kernel so they can boot Redndoes. While linus told them to use existing means, they'll likely try again in other ways to get better control of the kernel under systemd. All of these actions bespeak of systemd being on an acquisition course. So if you can't understand why someone might assert that it's trying to become everything, you haven't been paying attention. Open and simple? Using text files for config rather than binary? Um... going for small pieces that do single things so other competing products can be dropped in to replace functionality (like mlocate being dropped in for locate -- as an example, or the hopping between boot loaders). If there is only 1 large systemd that does all of the funcions that previously had "competition", then we no longer have modularity or the ability to choose the better implementations. Monolithic tools have not been been considered good players in the unix environment. So what does systemd do? Does it stay in the middle for each byte, or does it hand over the connections 1 at a time? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

Le 17/04/2014 12:39, Anton Aylward a écrit : when we all have an optical fiber network at any moment, well... I have a so bas experience of network each time a go out of my house... jdd -- http://www.dodin.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2014-04-17 14:12, auxsvr(a)gmail.com wrote: Arguably, signatures are not part of the content of the email and are not subject to the general "rules". The only rule specified of signatures is this: +++················· Signatures Signatures in emails should be not longer then 4 lines long. Information: McQuary Limit ·················++- And that signature matches that rule. You may push for a netiquette rule restricting content in signatures, but so far, we don't have it. I suggest you take that to the project mail list. ( And in any case, that text in the signature you object to, is in fact signed by somebody else. You should direct your opinion to that person instead, IMO. And freedom of speech applies. :-) ) - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

On Thursday 17 of April 2014 14:28:04 Carlos E. R. wrote: So, if one puts part of his slanderous answer in a signature, that means that the project condones this behaviour? There's a gap here between what the quotation was about and what you and others claim. According to the quotation, a man of faith is ill. Since being ill is not someone's opinion but a factual statement, which in this case is plainly false (what medical condition is caused by or is the consequence of faith?) and illness carries negative connotation, this quotation is slanderous, it is not just an opinion. Slanderous statements are by definition attacks against a person by denigrating his inherent qualities, one of which is his health. Imagine, for example, someone claiming that "people whose name is Carlos are sick". Is this merely an opinion? Also, this quotation was not presented in this mailing list by the one who said it, it was presented here by Anton Aylward, who apparently agrees with it. Are you implying that one cannot be offensive or slanderous if he quotes someone else's words? Regards, Peter -- Now I can slander everyone here without consequences! -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

On Thursday 17 of April 2014 16:21:34 Carlos E. R. wrote: Would I be asking too much to get an answer for my questions? I notice that in general you don't end discussions abruptly. Regards, Peter -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

On 17/04/14 17:25, Dsant wrote: Oh I don't know. I think what many trolls probably need is to be felt ;) Feeding, on the other hand... (Other) Peter -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 12:46 PM, <auxsvr(a)gmail.com> wrote: Peter, I agree James post is the most off-topic and therefore the most improper post in this thread. This is not the place to discuss religion, atheism, etc. I hope he doesn't post about it again. But Peter, you should be communicating with the list owner about your complaint, please do that without the rest of the list in copy. To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org If there is another place to send netiquette complaints, he/she can point you to the right place. Thanks Greg -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

On 04/17/2014 12:14 PM, Lew Wolfgang wrote: Comon over. We could use the new blood. *<]:oD -- I may be crazy, but crazy is better than stupid. _ _... ..._ _ _._ ._ ..... ._.. ... .._ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2014-04-17 17:21, auxsvr(a)gmail.com wrote: I have my beliefs on the matter, but I will not air them, in any direction, in a Linux public forum. My understanding, regarding netiquette, is that people get a free hand in what they write in the signature part of emails, This is a tradition. Sometimes what gets there is put by an automatic program, getting random texts from somewhere, not directly by the email writer, outside of his direct control. I consider those signatures not to be part of the email, and thus, not subject to the general netiquette rules. So I will not enter a discussion about what they contain. At most, if I like one a lot, it makes me laugh, or if I want further info, I may comment. I never criticize the sender. Thus, the only written rule in the netiquette link you provided is that it should be 4 lines at most, it does not say anything about the contents. If you want that changed, well, propose to change that. But not in this list. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 4:16 PM, &lt;auxsvr(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: Geez, drop it already. You've proved your pointless point. No one here cares. You're perceived offense is a non-issue and NOT related to openSUSE in any way shape or form. C. -- openSUSE 13.1 x86_64, KDE 4.12 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

On 04/17/2014 10:16 AM, auxsvr(a)gmail.com wrote: Not so. Many people claim they are ill and doctors disagree. Many so-called illnesses are 'politically correct' rather than factual. ADD used to e kids just running about in low density towns&country, not its an 'illness'. Under various political regimes disagreeing with the government is considered a 'mental illness' and not an 'opinion'. YMMV. All this amounts to is kids arguing: "I have faith that I can pizz higher on the wall than you can." Lets drop this thread in a deep well. -- "In the confrontation between the stream and the rock, the stream always wins ? not through strength but by perseverance." -- H. Jackson Brown. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

On Thursday 17 of April 2014 11:34:55 Anton Aylward wrote: I'm not a lawyer, although I could ask a relative of mine about the matter, but saying that someone is ill is not merely an opinion, since doctors can decide based on facts whether this is true or false. What you and others are trying to convince me about here frankly does not make any sense at all. I based it on the assumption that what one posts on the internet is not by accident or mistake. If I were wrong, I retract this comment, but I don't think I'm wrong, because you never apologized for it. Actually, both of you are wrong, otherwise journalists would be immune to defamation lawsuits. I'm not trying to invoke legal arguments here, I'm just stating the obvious fact that falsely calling people collectively sick is against the netiquette. Seriously, is this so hard to understand? If I call you sick and you're healthy or if I say that engineers are sick people, isn't this slanderous, abusive or aggressive? Regards, Peter -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

Peter, et al -- ...and then auxsvr(a)gmail.com said... % ... % against the netiquette. Seriously, is this so hard to understand? If I call % you sick and you're healthy or if I say that engineers are sick people, isn't % this slanderous, abusive or aggressive? Nope. % % Regards, % Peter HANN :-D -- David T-G See http://justpickone.org/davidtg/email/ See http://justpickone.org/davidtg/tofu.txt

On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Linda Walsh &lt;suse(a)tlinx.org&gt; wrote: Peter may be bored, or not, but I don't think he qualifies as a piece of wood. ;-) (sorry, couldn't resist. ;-) ) Not to hijack this thread, but do these automated, random sig generators not provide a means for the author of the email to have it generate another if he or she doesn't like/agree with the one provided on a given instance? I have never used one, but I would regard a failure to provide me the ability to veto specific quotes provided a serious design flaw. If we look at Anton's signatures, some, like the one Peter is objecting to, are offensive, but others are great. He had one today that quoted Bertrand Russell, that I quite liked, and actually agreed with (a surprise because Russel and I agree on so few things). If I were using the generator that Anton is using, I would want the ability to have the offensive one replaced by another, such as the quote of Russell. I don't know about others, but I take responsibility for everything in emails I send, whether it is a question of quoting another author fairly, or material I write, and, yes, even my signature (which you'll notice is short and sweet). I have not been much interested in using sig generators, but I could be, provided I had final control over what the generator put into my sig. But perhaps that's just me. Cheers Ted -- R.E.(Ted) Byers, Ph.D.,Ed.D. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

jdebert wrote: ---- It has always been a the standard to ignore signatures, else every message would be an invitation to an off-topic discussion. Only a small minority of sigs rise to the point of being sufficiently offensive, that action needs to be taken -- but if you look at the number of sigs, and look at the number that are even commented on, I think you will find what I said is true -- the project, as a whole, ignores what is in a sig. My body ignores dust that settles on it. That's a reasonably true statement, but if it was some deadly toxin that cause my skin to rot, or if it was enough dust to suffocate me, THEN it's gone beyond "normal" and my body can't ignore it. ==== Um... Where is the law mentioned? Where is it said that admins are bound by law? Or that anyone was talking about admins? When I say "the project", I mean the majority (or vocal minority, perhaps) that post here and make themselves known as regular members. The admin is not the project -- they may have final say so on what can and can't be done, but they probably want to interfere in children's squabbles about as much as change someone else's kids diapers. The discretion, and authority, yes. The obligation? Now you are the one dictating "rules" to the "admin[s]". They have no obligation to listen to what you consider to be their obligations. ;-) ---- I didn't say they were unreasonable, I said if they get worked up over a random quote-generator output, that may not even represent the opinion of the writer, they are not engaging in 'reasonable' discussion or expectations. And of course -- too many men throughout history -- women have been unreasonable and ill. The word 'hysteria' comes the Greek word for "uterus". In a similar way "dick" comes from slang for a male organ that is one degree less than a full blown asshole. Does that imply a male tendency to go overboard a bit on things -- seriously I want to KNOW RIGHT NOW!!!!.... (not to be hysterical or anything...)...(that was a rhetorical question)... ---- If that's how people see me, then they won't. I don't have one. Too bad people don't see people for what they are saying... That would require too much constant thought... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

On 2014-04-19 16:30, Ted Byers wrote: I hate to enter this discussion, but I will, briefly. I happen to be a christian, and I don't feel attacked. I strongly believe in freedom of religion and speech. I acknowledge the right of atheists and agnostics to voice what they think of religion, same as any religion may say what they think of any other religion. I see it as criticism, under freedom of speech and religion, not personal attack. IMO, reacting to a quoted text in a signature should be addressed to the person that originally said that idea, not to the quoter. Even less if it is a random quote. Surely in the pool of random quotes there will be things that disgust many other groups. Are we going to enter endless discussions about all of those? Reacting strongly to such a signature draws even more attacks, igniting a discussion about religion, which is off-topic here. If a person reacts strongly in Internet, he must be prepared to even more strong reactions against his reaction. If that is his wish, fine, but please do it in the offtopic mail list, not here. A polite reaction might have been more useful. And yes, at least I suggested to take this to the project list instead, asking for change of the netiquette rules on signatures, so that they explicitly say what can be written there or not. As they currently are, a random signature generator is not in violation of the current rules. Maybe the rules should be modified, because it is not the first time we get similar brawls about signatures. Enough said :-/ -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)

Le 19/04/2014 22:32, Anton Aylward a écrit : I don't do that, but people that do can always resign. that said commercial advertisement a rarely offensive, it would be counter-productive adversely, using random signature may be a bad idea if the signature is not thing you endorse. I personally think it's a bad idea. I want to assume every bit of thing that I let in the net (even if signatures are usually not archived) to be constructive one may look at "fortune" man page and see: "When fortune is run with no arguments it prints out a random epigram. Epigrams are divided into several categories, where each category is sub-divided into those which are potentially offensive and those which are not." and "If a particular set of fortunes is particularly unwanted, there is an easy solution: delete the associated .dat file. This leaves the data intact, should the file later be wanted, but since fortune no longer finds the pointers file, it ignores the text file." fortune is aimed to be displayed in own terminal, to use it on mail signature using non offending ones seems to be better IMHO jdd -- http://www.dodin.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

On 04/19/2014 06:01 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote: +1 I recall someone in the media commenting that no matter what the program is, no matter what the subject matter or how it is presented, there is always someone who will take offence at it for some reason, and at the same time someone who agrees firmly with it. -- Don't worry about the world coming to an end today. It's already tomorrow in Australia. -- Charles M. Schulz -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

On 04/17/2014 08:36 AM, Cristian Rodríguez wrote: Thank you :-) -- Plurality is never to be posited without need. --Occam -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

Anton Aylward wrote: --- It's a slow day.... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

auxsvr(a)gmail.com wrote: Fact is, religion is, always was and always will be delusion. Newton lived at a time when people were finally starting to challenge religion for the nonsense it is. Religion was created at a time when people could not understand the world around them and so created myths to explain what they saw. Religion is rooted in those that ignorance, myth and superstition. There is plenty of real evidence that shows religion is false. There is absolutely nothing to support it. History, archaeology and even the bible itself are full of examples that contradict contradict religious claims. So, yes, if you "believe", you are delusional. If you think otherwise, it's your responsibility to provide real proof that there is in fact a god. Until then, religion is nonsense that's all too often used to justify bigotry, hatred and violence. It also causes some people to avoid taking responsibility for themselves or to deny proper medical care in favour of "faith". That is but an small example of the nonsense that is religion. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

Can we shut this down before Godwin gets involved -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

auxsvr(a)gmail.com wrote: Especially considering that the Scientific Method, which is so revered by the Christian-haters, was DEVELOPED BY CHRISTIANS. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

On Sunday 20 Apr 2014 03:44:33 Dirk Gently wrote: Probably more like scientists who were also christians but then didn't apply the scientific method to their delusional belief (maybe due to being threatened by the religious) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

* James Knott &lt;james.knott(a)rogers.com&gt; [04-20-14 08:02]: It's OFF-TOPIC here TAKE it to Off-Topic DROP it HERE! Have a small amount of courtesy. We are adults, not kindergardeners. -- (paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA @ptilopteri http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member facebook/ptilopteri http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2 Registered Linux User #207535 @ http://linuxcounter.net -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

El 17/04/14 08:05, Carlos E. R. escribió: There was no bug to be fixed (it was already fixed), they problem was somewhere else ..Kay was correct in his assessment and Torvalds..well thinks he can go around demanding things and acting like a complete douche, that is not tolerated in the systemd land, his tantrums will be summarily ignored and mocked. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

Le 17/04/2014 14:52, Anton Aylward a écrit : may be those involved in "critical" should invest some money testing? If they use free code without any testing, so bad for them... jdd -- http://www.dodin.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2014-04-17 16:26, Anton Aylward wrote: That's a good point. In fact, I'm surprised we are not attacked in strength from the proprietary software camp. They can say that the free software camp is not professional enough and that mission critical tasks should not be allowed to run in Linux. Or, maybe they keep mildly silent because they are afraid of another similar fiasco being found on the proprietary camp... - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

On 4/17/2014 10:38 AM, Per Jessen wrote: Yes, absolutely. There are Microsoft infested/invested shops where this mentality exists and is heavily enforced every day. Do they look ridiculous? Perhaps to you and me, but not to their bosses and their bosses' boss. You have no idea how much idiocy abounds in some big organizations. -- _____________________________________ ---This space for rent--- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

On 2014-04-17 19:45, John Andersen wrote: I know. I have met some of them. Absolutely. Consider also that many professionals prefer to use software backed by a company, and follow their recommendations to the letter. If something fails and the company they installed this software is damaged, they point to the company that created the software. Provided they followed their instructions to the letter, they are safe. Their bosses/employees can sue that company if they want... and will probably fail. They are not silly, there is a provision that says something about the software not being valid for any purpose whatsoever, or words to that effect. If they install something like Linux, it is their asses that get burnt. Of course, probably there are variations of both ways of thinking depending on countries and legal systems. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)

John Andersen wrote: I do, I've been there in a previous life. Obviously MS can "fight" open source on their own turf, but if they need to argue that "free software camp is not professional enough", they've already lost. IMHO. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (7.6°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

Carlos E. R. wrote: This thread has already gone way OT, let's continue on opensuse-offtopic, if anyone is interested. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (10.2°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

Anton Aylward wrote: ---- On new development in systemd. Ergo, it's systemd's fault. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

On 04/16/2014 11:25 PM, Linda Walsh wrote: There could also be a perfectly reasonable explanation why Microsoft (and others) have followed UNIX/Linux in so many ways, including, eventually as shell rather than a gui. After all, Linux is open source. The differentiator in my mind is that Windows has the Directory, well aren't there two of them?, while Linux sticks to text files for configuration. Or is MS not following Linux in that and giving up on the directory as a Bad Idea? We _can_ make the root FS of Linux RO, but the way the directory works you can't do that with desktop Windows, you have to do other gyrations to use Windows as an appliance with a RO FS. Its just another way that Linux can be strapped down to be resilient in the face of a malicious environment. Ultimately Microsoft copied UNIX is that UNIX pioneered writing the OS in a HLL - 'C'. Back when I was working on BSD4.1 and 4.2 I recall the race between Bill Joy and David Cuttler. All Cuttler's efforts to speed up VMS by carefully tuning the assembler were matched by Joy in minutes coding in C. It must have been frustrating for Cuttler as he eventually stated he would never write another OS in assembler. Hence WNT (which is to VMS the way HAL of 2001 is to IBM, so demonstrating the 'if you can't create then copy' principle) was written in C. The point isn't that systemd follows some other design. In fact its very specific to Linux. From what I see it would take quite some re-working to incorporate it into some of the Big Iron version of UNIX, but one never knows. The point is that the sysvinit technique had reached the limits of its capability. I'm a great advocate of shell and CLI and laughed out loud when I heard of Window's "Power Shell" -- it proved the GUI approach was totally unsuited to the kind of 'automation' that system administration, especially of large numbers of possibly virtual machines demands. But while the shell is a great Swiss army knife, it is just that. For specific tasks it can be far from the best solution. Its not that you can't build a dispatcher with the shell; I have. But after a point the shell model gets inefficient. Prime among then was that the sysvinit model was sequential and was most certainly not a dispatcher in the sense of monitoring the tasks asynchronously. UNIX/Linux is not set in stone. If it was we'd still be running something out of the 1970s or 1980s, V6, V7 or possibly an early BSD if you insisted on having networking for email and netnews, though that networking might be UUCP rather then TCP. -- When languishing for solutions, don't ask "Have I got the correct answer?" The correct question is "Have I got the correct question?" -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

Anton Aylward wrote: Extremely poorly documented. I've used Unix since 1983 and administrated it since 1993... and I don't know a single person who can make heads or tails of how to SysV init was simple --- it forks off scripts. So simple, in fact, that if init were to fail, you could actually replicate what init does BY HAND with a simple For F in /etc/init.d/rc5.d/K* do $F stop done For F in /etc/init.d/rc3.d/S* do $F start done or whatever. and, of course, run a few commands found in /etc/inittab What SystemD actually DOES and how it does it... I haven't the foggiest fucking clue, and that's not for a lack of reading of the documentation. If you can't even understand how your system boots up, then you don't really have control of your system in the slightest. SysV is simple enough that it could be implemented in a short shellscript, and most of all, it's OBVIOUS what it does, and HOW it does it. Not so for SystemD. And worst of all, it has ill-defined, and constantly moving boundaries. Least of all, when people try to ask the SystemD team simple questions, such as "what is SystemD supposed to do and how is it supposed to do it," rather than just answering the damned question, there's all sorts of handwaving and other gyrations, RTFM, and "you're too stupid to understand" When people act like that -- it indicates to me that they're either trying to hide something... or... they're trying to hide something. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2014-04-20 14:19, Anton Aylward wrote: Thanks. I like what you say. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

On 04/20/2014 12:55 PM, Dirk Gently pecked at the keyboard and wrote: Come now Aron. Oops was I supposed to keep your secret identity secret? -- Ken Schneider SuSe since Version 5.2, June 1998 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

Anton Aylward wrote: I've been reading documentation written by programmers and technical people since 1980. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

listreader wrote: Where did I say, or even imply, the SAME document? Perhaps you should stick to reading lists, as discussion is evidently beyond your comprehension. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

On 22/04/14 03:54, Dirk Gently wrote: And humour is obviously beyond yours - which is strange for someone claiming to be a fictional detective... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org