Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu Plans For A Future With Upstart

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by uid313 View Post
    Why doesn't the distributions use launchd instead of systemd and Upstart?
    One reason: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Launchd...tside_Mac_OS_X
    Also why would they?
    They could also simply use BSD init.

    Comment


    • #17
      Yeah, depending on Apple to write your init system is the best idea ever.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by LightBit View Post
        Upstart is older than systemd.
        Ordering doesn't matter. If a better solution comes along, and you refuse to use it because you like your pet solution, then it's still NIH. That may or may not be what's going on here, but it wouldn't surprise me.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by siride View Post
          Ordering doesn't matter. If a better solution comes along, and you refuse to use it because you like your pet solution, then it's still NIH. That may or may not be what's going on here, but it wouldn't surprise me.
          In programming, it is also common to refer to the NIH Syndrome as the tendency towards reinventing the wheel (reimplementing something that is already available) based on the belief that in-house developments are inherently better suited, more secure or more controlled than existing implementations.
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_inv...e#In_computing

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by LightBit View Post
            One reason: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Launchd...tside_Mac_OS_X
            Also why would they?
            They could also simply use BSD init.
            Why would they?
            It seems Apple successfully deployed it. So its kinda proven.

            Why would they not?
            I don't know. Is there anything bad about it?

            Reason not to use it was it was ASPL, now it is Apache License, so is there any reason not to use it or re-consider it?


            Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
            Yeah, depending on Apple to write your init system is the best idea ever.
            They got money to pour into launchd, and they will keep on developing launchd for a while probably. If they don't, the community can develop it since its free open source software.

            Any reason not to use launchd?

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by uid313 View Post
              Why would they?
              It seems Apple successfully deployed it. So its kinda proven.
              Apple can deploy anything to their users.


              Originally posted by uid313 View Post
              Why would they not?
              I don't know. Is there anything bad about it?

              Reason not to use it was it was ASPL, now it is Apache License, so is there any reason not to use it or re-consider it?
              There is no need to change init every few years.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by uid313 View Post
                Any reason not to use launchd?
                Because we have systemd. If Ubuntu is willing to change their init system it would make absolutely no sense to switch to anything else but systemd because it's soon to become the de facto init system for Linux in every form factor and it is also more advanced than the alternatives in just about everyway.
                Last edited by Teho; 05-12-2012, 01:10 PM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  @Teho
                  Considering that the latest Phoronix survey put Ubuntu at >50% Linux desktop share, and that the only other distro which has the prospects to make significant inroads into the desktop (ChromeOS) also uses Upstart, I'd say calling systemd the soon-to-be "de facto init system for Linux" is stretching it.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by chithanh View Post
                    @Teho
                    Considering that the latest Phoronix survey put Ubuntu at >50% Linux desktop share, and that the only other distro which has the prospects to make significant inroads into the desktop (ChromeOS) also uses Upstart, I'd say calling systemd the soon-to-be "de facto init system for Linux" is stretching it.
                    I agree that the init situation is going to stay complicated for a while, like I wrote already. But I don't think that Ubuntu's market share has anything to do with it.

                    Ubuntu is extremely popular, but they have never been a technical leader, nor will they ever be one. They can't do things on their own, and typically only package other people's work. That's their core competence: marketing and polish. This recent policy of forking Linux away and doing everything in an incompatible way, with Unity and upstart, is going to fail.

                    There are basically three distros which have the power to make others follow. Fedora, OpenSUSE and Debian. Among these, Fedora is unquestionably number one, given the amount of key people they are directly funding. Slack, Gentoo and Arch all do good work, but form a (very respectable) fringe.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by chithanh View Post
                      @Teho
                      Considering that the latest Phoronix survey put Ubuntu at >50% Linux desktop share, and that the only other distro which has the prospects to make significant inroads into the desktop (ChromeOS) also uses Upstart, I'd say calling systemd the soon-to-be "de facto init system for Linux" is stretching it.
                      Well it kinda depends how you take it. It's probably going to be part of the next RHEL and SLES releases which means it's also going to be used in CentOS, Unbreakable Linux and Scientific Linux to name a few in the future. These are the distributions that matter in the server space. It's also desinged mobile devices in mind and it's already used by both Mer and Tizen projects and the latter will ship in phones this year. That also makes it kinda obvious choise for future mobile platforms like Meltemi. It has also focus on embedded systemd and there's even a consulation firm that developes and provides support for it already. I don't see any future platforms picking Upstart instead of systemd because it's quite simply an inferior product. Yes, Ubuntu and Chrome OS use it but that's just about it. It's developed by single party when systemd is developed by many. I don't see any reason why Chrome OS couldn't jump to systemd anyday now.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        it's also going to be used in CentOS, Unbreakable Linux and Scientific Linux to name a few in the future. These are the distributions that matter in the server space.
                        Call me old-fashioned, but I thought that Debian was more important in the server space than all of those combined, and AFAIK they have no plans to move.

                        In the enthusiast space, Slack, Arch, and Gentoo are not moving, but enthusiasts are like that, they like swimming against the current.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                          Call me old-fashioned, but I thought that Debian was more important in the server space than all of those combined, and AFAIK they have no plans to move.
                          Well it isn't so there is not much of an argument there. One of the prime reasons why Debian hasn't moved to systemd and probably aren't going to do so in a long time is because they want to play with their toys like freebsd and hurd. They are however working on integrating systemd better in to the distribution. So if someone wants to setup a serious Linux box then they could simply replace the old init system.

                          Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                          In the enthusiast space, Slack, Arch, and Gentoo are not moving, but enthusiasts are like that, they like swimming against the current.
                          All new packages have been compiled with systemd unit files for awhile now in Arch Linux and they are planning to move systemd to the core soon. There's no ETA on when the default init system is going to be replaced though.
                          Last edited by Teho; 05-13-2012, 05:23 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                            Call me old-fashioned, but I thought that Debian was more important in the server space than all of those combined, and AFAIK they have no plans to move.

                            In the enthusiast space, Slack, Arch, and Gentoo are not moving, but enthusiasts are like that, they like swimming against the current.
                            old fashioned no, but totally off base wrt server deployments in the real world.

                            Dave.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by airlied View Post
                              old fashioned no, but totally off base wrt server deployments in the real world.

                              Dave.
                              I specifically took out RHEL and SLES out of the picture. They are huge players.

                              And despite the popularity of CentOS, I'd imagine Debian to play a bigger role, and things like Scientific Linux are a blip on the radar.

                              EDIT: http://w3techs.com/blog/entry/debian...on_web_servers
                              Last edited by pingufunkybeat; 05-13-2012, 08:38 AM.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                                Ubuntu is extremely popular, but they have never been a technical leader, nor will they ever be one. They can't do things on their own, and typically only package other people's work. That's their core competence: marketing and polish. This recent policy of forking Linux away and doing everything in an incompatible way, with Unity and upstart, is going to fail.
                                Agreed. They're taking on a huge maintenance burden by doing things the way they are. RedHat learned that lesson years ago, finding that working more closely with upstream was a lot easier than maintaining large sets of patches for core components. And sooner or later, Ubuntu are going to have to come to grips with that. You have to distinguish yourself from your competitors, but you also need to be smart about where you spend your resources.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X