Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Systemd 197 Brings "Quite Some Cool New Stuff"

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

  • #71
    Originally posted by 89c51 View Post
    Nah. The best (read most stupid) argument against it remains the "Unix pholosophy" one.
    That's got to be the wrongest argument, since Systemd brings multi-seat, and thus UNIX' server-client computing to the table.

    So that means that Systemd and PulseAudio (routing audio), are bringing graphical multimedia terminals, ran on a single server computer, to life on Linux.

    How is that against the UNIX philosophy as it makes Linux more UNIX-like, by fixing what's definately broken in terms of client-server computing?

    Comment


    • #72
      Originally posted by V!NCENT View Post
      That's got to be the wrongest argument, since Systemd brings multi-seat, and thus UNIX' server-client computing to the table.

      So that means that Systemd and PulseAudio (routing audio), are bringing graphical multimedia terminals, ran on a single server computer, to life on Linux.

      How is that against the UNIX philosophy as it makes Linux more UNIX-like, by fixing what's definately broken in terms of client-server computing?
      Hammer. Hits. The. Nail.

      Well put! There seems to be a huge misunderstanding about being "UNIX". The neckbeardos think it is means "support a bunch of BSDs and inits without compability issues and the cost of the complexity is handled by some invisible wizard elfs with unlimited ressources."

      Truth is that Linux can only gain some feature parity with UNIX by focussing the ressources. And to do so it is absolutely a MUST to cut the hours wasted on dead-ends like BSDs, forked shit and inits. Your example of multi seat support is just the tip of the iceberg. Linux is hampered by neckbeardism and systemd is the just medicine for such a desease.
      Last edited by funkSTAR; 01-11-2013, 07:28 AM.

      Comment


      • #73
        Originally posted by ryao View Post
        Is there any way that anyone could contradict you that would result in you accepting that you were wrong?
        There's nothing wrong with comedy

        Comment


        • #74
          Originally posted by dee. View Post
          Hm. That's odd. I could have sworn there was a windows version of GIMP...
          That wasn't my point.

          Originally posted by a user
          of course. windows, mac, linux, various mobile/embeded plattforms....

          as far as i know much better and easier than with qt.
          Well, as far as I know, wx is very similar to MFC, and that thing on the other hand scares me just with its name..
          I'm not so sure it would be easier for me than modern Qt.

          Originally posted by dee. View Post
          From what I can tell, GTK works just fine on both windows and mac. I'm not aware of any specific issues that would prevent porting GTK apps, as GTK is designed to be cross-platform.
          I wasn't talking about "working", but "ease of deploying".

          Comment


          • #75
            Originally posted by funkSTAR View Post
            Wow. It is very rare to meet people who is suffering from your level of denial. Digias business case is to offer its products under commercial license. Both to earn money and keep the client out of the freedom loop by claiming open source can harm their business oportunities. Oh yeah and besides belittling the open source licenses they sell the commercial version with added value like more patches and commercial addons.

            To them the open source version is only damaged goods which will attract potential future closed source customers. A mordern version of shareware where the can lure customers and scoop up free patches by the means of CLA.

            I suggest you go have a look up at their page. And oh yeah make an inquiry to their sales department as well. Pretend to be confused about licenses and you will have a sale engineer talk FUD about LGPLs "risks and limitations" in five minutes. I have a former boss who went anti-open source because a 5 min chat with a Qt sales engineer. He had a neutral view before that. Im sure he still misinformed and spreads the license FUD in every elevator pitch.

            Qt is having having benefints every time open source is getting FUDed. Digias business case is to fuck open source by be two faced liars. And any one with a brain can fugure it out when the look at the business case.
            Digias offers commercial licenses because some companies just can't really do anything at all with GPL, ie. they somehow need to statically compile Qt or do other crazy shit I don't know.
            Also, for many companies it is very important to have reliable and professional support, something they would never get in forums or mailing lists.
            That's why Digia is a god-send really: Make money from commercial customers, and pump it back into the open source project.
            Oh, and Digia is not alone. There are many projects doing just the same, such as libvncserver, or sdl for example.

            We use Qt at work too, but the LGPL one, together with a full-blown Linux/Xorg/Gnome stack for our next product.
            Meanwhile, our boss is completely oblivious to the workings of software. It basically went something like this:
            "Does it cost anything to use?" "No."
            "Does it force us to open up anything?" "No, we just need to put up Qt sources."
            "Okay let's use it!"

            Comment


            • #76
              Originally posted by V!NCENT View Post
              That's got to be the wrongest argument, since Systemd brings multi-seat, and thus UNIX' server-client computing to the table.

              So that means that Systemd and PulseAudio (routing audio), are bringing graphical multimedia terminals, ran on a single server computer, to life on Linux.

              How is that against the UNIX philosophy as it makes Linux more UNIX-like, by fixing what's definately broken in terms of client-server computing?
              It doesn't make Linux more UNIX-like:
              Systemd (core) does too much. I think Systemd (core) should only start and watch daemons and there should be eventd for dbus, time (cron, at), socket ... activation.
              Systemd's logger has binary format.

              Comment


              • #77
                Originally posted by LightBit View Post
                It doesn't make Linux more UNIX-like:
                Systemd (core) does too much. I think Systemd (core) should only start and watch daemons and there should be eventd for dbus, time (cron, at), socket ... activation.
                Systemd's logger has binary format.
                Here's a recent interview where Poettering himself describes systemd as complying with the UNIX philosophy.

                https://fosdem.org/2013/interviews/2...rt-poettering/

                Comment


                • #78
                  Originally posted by Ericg View Post
                  Complexity: Valid concern, partially defeated by systemd's modular nature (think Linux kernel modules.)
                  Bugs: Valid concern...partially defeated by modular nature.
                  Choice: Valid concern...partially defeated by modular nature.
                  Remember, we're not even talking about the modular parts of systemd here through, just the really core parts that run in pid 1. Pid 1 is unfortunately really system-critical - if it crashes, Linux immediately halts with a panic, wherreas it can usually continue limping along for a while if a kernel driver falls over. Last time I looked you actually needed to patch the kernel in order to be able to attach a debugger to it too.

                  Originally posted by funkSTAR View Post
                  Yes. The ugly patches, the bug reports, the compability issues, the bikeshedding, the forksters and flamers all belong to the distros desiring crazy shit. Not the generic upstream.
                  Except, of course, that systemd isn't generic at all - it's designed by one distro, Fedora, for their distro-specific needs and Red Hat are the ones who shoved it into the generic upstream udev which every distro relies. You're basically claiming that, by complaining about upstream foisting distro-specific crap onto them, other distros are themselves trying to bend the "generic" upstream to their own needs. I cannot comprehend what would cause you to make such a bizarre and idiotic argument.

                  Comment


                  • #79
                    Originally posted by XorEaxEax View Post
                    Here's a recent interview where Poettering himself describes systemd as complying with the UNIX philosophy.

                    https://fosdem.org/2013/interviews/2...rt-poettering/
                    He is biased. And it does comply with some parts.
                    Anyway, thanks for the link.

                    Comment


                    • #80
                      Originally posted by Ancurio View Post
                      I wasn't talking about "working", but "ease of deploying".
                      So what exactly makes it hard to port GTK apps?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X