Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Phasing Out SysVInit In openSUSE Raises Concerns

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by AnonymousCoward View Post
    Yeah right, except that it isn't.
    Yeah, it is.

    Comment


    • #17
      Interesting thread. Systemd provides hooks for scripts... so the scripting argument can really be used. If I found one things I didn't like is that in sysvinit you had the ability to set shell ulimits globally using /etc/initscript as a frontend to all scripts executed in init. I guess what I'd like to see is the idea of ulimits promoted somehow (if it were possible) into cgroups. Since cgroups are how some limits are already done....

      Just an idea.

      Systemd is where everything is going.... like it or not. Yes... if you follow the list there are still lots of things being tweaked... so there will be some people affected by it.... it will all get fixed. But I think we're beyond the ability to discuss anything but an all systemd future at this point.

      Is systemd easier? Yes and no. I think it's likely to be a better question to ask everyone a year from now. People tend to get used to the way things are done... and by that time, systemd will likely be considered easier. With that said, for those of us on heterogeneous networks, don't through away sysv style init since it still has some application there (though even there, much less than it used to).

      I like how runlevels are being simulated ... not sure if that's a lasting thing or not (or even something outside of openSUSE)... but does ease things a bit. Also, I think the idea of preserving the command "service" is going to work going forward (?). I mean, it's already an abstraction mechanism... vs. making systemctl calls for start/stop.

      I a bit concerned over the move to place everything into /usr... I understand the reasoning, and I suppose the idea of having a mandatory indirect point isn't necessarily a bad idea... so maybe this will grow on me. But I do wonder if the the folks pushing for this fully understand the reasons why it might be a bad idea (?).

      Also concerned about the future of syslog*.... and daemons that will have to be changed to operate properly in a systemd world.... all fixable no doubt, just very different.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
        That doesn't sound at all like a bug in systemd, but in opensuse's configuration of it.
        The quality issues in SUSE have been going on a lot longer than since they effectively became Microsoft Linux back in 2006 with the Novell deal, then were bought by a Microsoft-controlled shell company earlier this year. They have every reason to want to make Red Hat's software look bad. What better way than by making a half-hearted half-assed attempt at integrating systemd then claiming that the problems in the way they configured it were actually problems in its design?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by DaemonFC View Post
          The quality issues in SUSE have been going on a lot longer than since they effectively became Microsoft Linux back in 2006 with the Novell deal, then were bought by a Microsoft-controlled shell company earlier this year. They have every reason to want to make Red Hat's software look bad. What better way than by making a half-hearted half-assed attempt at integrating systemd then claiming that the problems in the way they configured it were actually problems in its design?
          Yeah only that these things just don't work like that. SuSE is owned by Attachmate Corporation and their goal is to make as much profit to their owners as possible not to please some other corporation. Do you honstly believe that if Microsoft was somehow sabotaging Novell that none of the thousands of developers would have spoken up? OpenSuSE is developed in the open and that's why things like that do not happen is secret. If you don't have any concrete evidence then spouting crap like that is just discrespectful towards the people who spent their time working on project that helps improve the Linux and open source ecosystem in total. But sure if you really have something please share.

          Comment


          • #20
            Pretty much all "Open" SUSE does is use other distributions as an upstream, and apparently integrate it poorly. They don't really do a lot of their own stuff anymore.

            "AttachMSFT" is a Microsoft Gold Partner.

            The only thing their SUSE division is there to do is trumpet the few remaining proprietary software applications they scavenged from the wreckage of Novell and finish running SUSE into the ground, while claiming to offer cut rate Red Hat support hijacking in partnership with Microsoft (complete with a joint SUSE/Microsoft site that is signed with a Microsoft SSL certificate).

            Businesses that fall for that will depend on Microsoft for support, and once you replace redhat-release with something from "MicroSUSE", you're not only no longer running RHEL, but you lose all of the certifications that RHEL has, including the ones that they have earned to verify that RHEL is dependable and secure enough for US government agencies.

            I don't trust "Open" SUSE because they depend on the people at "AttachMSFT"'s "MicroSUSE" division holding the purse strings, owning the copyrights and trademarks to a good part of the distribution, deciding what goes in and how it is configured, or often, misconfigured...
            Last edited by DaemonFC; 12-20-2011, 11:00 PM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Teho View Post
              Yeah only that these things just don't work like that. SuSE is owned by Attachmate Corporation and their goal is to make as much profit to their owners as possible not to please some other corporation. Do you honstly believe that if Microsoft was somehow sabotaging Novell that none of the thousands of developers would have spoken up?
              After running Novell ZENworks for a fair few years here, Novell certainly haven't needed MS/Attachmate to do any sabotaging for them....

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by runrun View Post
                Novell certainly haven't needed MS/Attachmate to do any sabotaging for them....
                That's kinda my point. There are real reasons for bad products and failures like incompetence and bad working culture. There shouldn't be need to bring up some near impossible conspiracy theory to explain that. I often get the feeling that these comments are more about anti-corporatism than free and open source software; it's exactly the same with environmental protection groups. It's no longer about facts or original agenda but rather just propaganda and hate. Now I don't know much about Novell and can't really speak for it.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Ever since that bat shit crazy Jeff Merkey guy started suing everyone that ever looked at him the wrong way, it kind of made me wonder how many such clowns Novell had or have had on their staff at some point.

                  The fact that he wrote a lot of Netware probably explains why it sucked so bad.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    On Fedora and Arch

                    Not sure about the openSUSE emplimentation, but systemd has worked pretty much flawlessly for me on Fedora, and hasn't given me much to complain about on Arch. The only issues I've run into are systemctl reboot seems a little wonky in Arch, and I've been having trouble getting filesystem mounts to work correctly on one system. However, on that system, I'm trying to mount two LUNs from a Drobo, and then combine them with AuFS, so it's not exactly a standard setup.

                    =-Jameson

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by ImNtReal View Post
                      Not sure about the openSUSE emplimentation, but systemd has worked pretty much flawlessly for me on Fedora, and hasn't given me much to complain about on Arch. The only issues I've run into are systemctl reboot seems a little wonky in Arch, and I've been having trouble getting filesystem mounts to work correctly on one system. However, on that system, I'm trying to mount two LUNs from a Drobo, and then combine them with AuFS, so it's not exactly a standard setup.

                      =-Jameson
                      I think pretty much all the problems OpenSuse has with systemd are caused by either not knowing what they are doing with it, or because they want to make Red Hat look bad on behalf of SUSE, which is a Microsoft Gold Partner.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X