Re: Dependencies are not automatically activated with `set enable`; is that correct?

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]

From: aitor <aitor_czr_at_gnuinos.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2026 21:42:40 +0200

Hi Luis,

On 10/21/26 18:30, lumaro.disroot.org via supervision wrote:
> the same applies to any service that has dbus as a dependency--for
> instance, `seatd` or `cupsd`

`seatd` doesn't depend on dbus

Cheers,

Aitor.
Received on Wed Oct 21 2026 - 21:42:40 CEST

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Brett Neumeier: "Re: Dependencies are not automatically activated with `set enable`; is that correct?"
Previous message: lumaro_at_disroot.org: "Dependencies are not automatically activated with `set enable`; is that correct?"
Maybe in reply to: lumaro_at_disroot.org: "Dependencies are not automatically activated with `set enable`; is that correct?"
Next in thread: Brett Neumeier: "Re: Dependencies are not automatically activated with `set enable`; is that correct?"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed Oct 21 2026 - 21:43:22 CEST