search for: pwduffy

> On 24 Jan 2016, at 17:45, Peter Duffy <peter at pwduffy.org.uk> wrote: > > On Sat, 2016-01-23 at 20:27 -0600, Frank Cox wrote: >> On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:05:02 -0500 >> Mark LaPierre wrote: >> >>> The main reason I'm still using, nearly obsolete, CentOS 6 is because I >>> don't want to have to deal w...

Once upon a time, Peter Duffy <peter at pwduffy.org.uk> said: > The thing which always gets me about systemd is not the thing itself, > but the way it was rolled out. When I first installed Red Hat 7, if a > window had appeared telling me about systemd and asking me if I wanted > to use it, or stick with the old init framework, I&...

On Sun, January 24, 2016 10:45 am, Peter Duffy wrote: > On Sat, 2016-01-23 at 20:27 -0600, Frank Cox wrote: >> On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:05:02 -0500 >> Mark LaPierre wrote: >> >> > The main reason I'm still using, nearly obsolete, CentOS 6 is because >> I >> > don't want to have to deal with Gnome 3. >> >> Install Mate on Centos 7 and

On Mon, 2016-01-25 at 08:05 -0600, Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Peter Duffy <peter at pwduffy.org.uk> said: > > The thing which always gets me about systemd is not the thing itself, > > but the way it was rolled out. When I first installed Red Hat 7, if a > > window had appeared telling me about systemd and asking me if I wanted > > to use it, or stick with the ol...

On Jan 24, 2016, at 6:40 PM, Peter Duffy <peter at pwduffy.org.uk> wrote: > The thing which always gets me about systemd is not the thing itself, > but the way it was rolled out. When I first installed Red Hat 7, if a > window had appeared telling me about systemd and asking me if I wanted > to use it, or stick with the old init framework, I...

On 01/26/2016 05:51 AM, Peter Duffy wrote: > On Mon, 2016-01-25 at 08:05 -0600, Chris Adams wrote: >> Once upon a time, Peter Duffy <peter at pwduffy.org.uk> said: >>> The thing which always gets me about systemd is not the thing itself, >>> but the way it was rolled out. When I first installed Red Hat 7, if a >>> window had appeared telling me about systemd and asking me if I wanted >>> to use it, or stick...

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:05:02 -0500 Mark LaPierre wrote: > The main reason I'm still using, nearly obsolete, CentOS 6 is because I > don't want to have to deal with Gnome 3. Install Mate on Centos 7 and you never have to touch Gnome 3. I did, and my desktops don't look or work any different today than they did under Centos 6. -- MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~

On what topic specifically do you need advice? On Mon, 2015-08-31 at 11:24 +0800, Martin Zhou wrote: > * Hi, I am Martin, coming from the east of china, is a novice for > Linux. Kindly give me your advice. Thanks. > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

On Sat, 2016-01-23 at 20:27 -0600, Frank Cox wrote: > On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:05:02 -0500 > Mark LaPierre wrote: > > > The main reason I'm still using, nearly obsolete, CentOS 6 is because I > > don't want to have to deal with Gnome 3. > > Install Mate on Centos 7 and you never have to touch Gnome 3. I did, > and my desktops don't look or work any

On Sun, 2016-01-24 at 12:01 -0600, Valeri Galtsev wrote: > Well, there is Linux distribution which is systemd-free. And that > distribution I predict will live for decently long time. It is "Devuan" - > a fork of Debian, stripped off systemd and friends... well, I should have > said: composed without systemd and friends. Devuan was forked off ebian > because of systemd.

On Tue, 2016-01-26 at 11:57 +0000, John Hodrien wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jan 2016, Peter Duffy wrote: > > https://wiki.debian.org/Debate/initsystem/systemd#Why_Debian_should_default_to_systemd > Might be more convincing if they stuck to reasoned argument, rather than propaganda. "Systemd is straightforward"; "systemd is incredibly fast (1 second to boot)" - reminds me

On Mon, 2016-01-25 at 16:53 +0000, Richard Mann wrote: > > > > Complaining on the CentOS list is probably not that productive, though. > > > > +1. To be constructive, the criticism would need to be done ELSEWHERE. On this list, it is just whining. It's not complaining. It's discussion.