Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Canonical Releases Upstart 1.6

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by funkSTAR View Post
    Oh the joy. Refering to Shuttleworths FUD is allways fun. Oh wait it is not. Because it is debunked. Go debunk yourself.
    This was a question. You know, the things that can be answered without the need to be rude.

    By quickly looking at the source code, it seems to me that systemd did not really evolve on test coverage. That's a shame.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by siban View Post
      Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil...
      Yes, ignorance of UNIX philosophy.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by LightBit View Post
        Yes, ignorance of UNIX philosophy.
        Nobody sane follows strictly UNIX philosophy these days. It's the reason why unix is dead and don't even mention bsd which is dead as well, because it's not competitive to anything.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by LightBit View Post
          Yes, ignorance of UNIX philosophy.
          UNIX Philosophy is not a bible. If you follow it like one then you are a zealot. You can solve any problem by following the UNIX philosophy, but that doesn't mean that the "UNIX Philosophy answer" is the BEST answer. Redhat and Lennart believe that systemd is the best solution for the problems they see. You want to disagree? Fine. Upstart is still being developed, same as OpenRC, so start being a contributor to either Ubuntu & Debian or Gentoo and then you can make sure things get done your way.

          I use systemd everyday on my Arch Box-- its a desktop, VM host, home-server and media center. It is stable as can be aside from an issue thats come up in the last few days, which is a kernel issue, not a systemd problem. I say bring on systemd, bring on pulse, bring on networkmanager-- though NM needs bridging support ASAP to handle VM access.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by kraftman View Post
            Nobody sane follows strictly UNIX philosophy these days. It's the reason why unix is dead and don't even mention bsd which is dead as well, because it's not competitive to anything.
            systemd is not even close to UNIX philosophy. Despite systemd is very sucessfully killing UNIX, it isn't dead (yet) (I consider Linux a UNIX). Nobody mentioned BSD.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by Ericg View Post
              UNIX Philosophy is not a bible. If you follow it like one then you are a zealot. You can solve any problem by following the UNIX philosophy, but that doesn't mean that the "UNIX Philosophy answer" is the BEST answer. Redhat and Lennart believe that systemd is the best solution for the problems they see. You want to disagree? Fine. Upstart is still being developed, same as OpenRC, so start being a contributor to either Ubuntu & Debian or Gentoo and then you can make sure things get done your way.
              The article was about Upstart.

              Of course the coinciding thread quickly got down to the business of criticizing the neanderthals at Canonical for not embracing The One True Way (TM) that is, of course, whatever is proposed by either Lennart and / or Red Hat, and in this specific case, systemd.

              The threads here are so reliably predictable and they're always good for a chuckle.

              Can't wait for the next NVIDIA driver update article... followed by the cries of "still no KMS... still no Wayland support... still no Optimus... still not open source". Over and over again.

              Yes, we get it... Upstart is not systemd. We shouldn't expect Canonical to bring systemd into Ubuntu any earlier than they announce that they're going to do so. Right now, Upstart is their way... and frankly, it works pretty damn well.




              (And I love the snobbery of some here that UNIX systems are somehow less competent solutions because they don't have the awesomeness that is systemd or whatever other Linux fad-of-the-day.)

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by Ericg View Post
                UNIX Philosophy is not a bible. If you follow it like one then you are a zealot. You can solve any problem by following the UNIX philosophy, but that doesn't mean that the "UNIX Philosophy answer" is the BEST answer. Redhat and Lennart believe that systemd is the best solution for the problems they see. You want to disagree? Fine. Upstart is still being developed, same as OpenRC, so start being a contributor to either Ubuntu & Debian or Gentoo and then you can make sure things get done your way.
                https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desk.../msg00427.html


                Originally posted by Ericg View Post
                I use systemd everyday on my Arch Box-- its a desktop, VM host, home-server and media center. It is stable as can be aside from an issue thats come up in the last few days, which is a kernel issue, not a systemd problem. I say bring on systemd, bring on pulse, bring on networkmanager-- though NM needs bridging support ASAP to handle VM access.
                I use sysvinit everyday on my Slackware desktop and it just works. I have no problems with OpenBSD init.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by LightBit View Post
                  Yes, ignorance of UNIX philosophy.
                  Unix philosophy is nothing but that - a philosophy, not holy writ handed down from god. It should certainly be considered when designing a new system, but it's not the only way to build good working software.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Standard & Better Tech

                    DeFacto open-source standard packages mean more development. Systemd has this. Upstart doesn't.
                    Systemd removes the absurdity of Dependencies & lets Linux really shine. This scales better to more CPUs (the future) while being great on 1 CPU too.

                    Scripting in standard startup is beta in nature. SystemD finalizes it in C, but leaves scripting open for one-off tasks.

                    SystemD (although having more purposes than Upstart) is nearer to the UNIX philosophy: "Do 1 thing & do it well" by ending the micromanagement once required of boot systems Upstart and Sys-V

                    Ubuntu's made great decisions, lets add to those by selecting the best init.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      I doubt anyone here will listen to me, but what Canonical is doing in Ubuntu is actually better for system reliability. Developers capable of reviewing systemd on technical merits find that it makes Linux systems less reliable. I do not think that the systemd developers even attempt to dispute this. The issue is that the kernel will panic if PID 1 dies and systemd's design makes it very difficult to avoid failures in PID 1.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X