© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
0e1f616
(Get the code!)
I read some other thread regarding Ubuntu making plymouth a too-strong dependency. et. al., so I guesss this is our bug. Most importantly, this:
https:/
...to which you ignored your users? And this:
https:/
...to which
It's increasingly possible that you have bug reporters who are capable of what they are doing, yet thwarted by "best approach" methods determined by people who are looking out for their own best interests. Although I might not question your take, if you would like this to go away then your users would greatly appreciate an explicitly sound explanation as to why you've decided to ram plymouth, which apparently ignores the console, our throats.
I've browsed at least a half-dozen other bug reports, some of them very long, which do not exist in debian systems.
Although debian is a pain too, at least they are open about everything and those of us wiling and capable of modifying C code, are not unilaterally thrown into the dustbin.
If someone at Canonical is willing to get onto a con-call regarding your userbase, I am happy to do so.
This is an Ubuntu-specific bug. Politically saying, that freedom should extend to new users. Hiding the boot process behind a compiled C program is a BAD THING. Our users should always have the option to understand and learn from the boot process from any terminal. And this should be an easy thing for them to do.