Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Systemd Gets A Stable Release Repository, Backports

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

  • Systemd Gets A Stable Release Repository, Backports

    Phoronix: Systemd Gets A Stable Release Repository, Backports

    Motivated in part by Debian switching to systemd and then Ubuntu switching to systemd, the systemd developers have now setup a stable repository for the widely-used init system for carrying back-ports to existing stable releases and sharing stable patches amongst package maintainers...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTYxOTA

  • #2
    Well, that's nice. One of the biggest point against systemd (that I agreed with) is that systemd is a big, moving target, that wouldn't exactly fit the Debian ideology.

    This fix it. Depending on how this works out, I could see this "stable" branch being adopted by more conservative distributions (IE not Arch). Especially if the systemd pace doesn't slow down (they seems to introduce some pretty big features/changes every release, and they release often).

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Spittie View Post
      Well, that's nice. One of the biggest point against systemd (that I agreed with) is that systemd is a big, moving target, that wouldn't exactly fit the Debian ideology.

      This fix it. Depending on how this works out, I could see this "stable" branch being adopted by more conservative distributions (IE not Arch). Especially if the systemd pace doesn't slow down (they seems to introduce some pretty big features/changes every release, and they release often).
      Well there aren't many distributions left. In case of Slackware I think that we'll rather see RMS using Microsoft Windows 8 on a Macbook than systemd being adopted as default init.

      Comment


      • #4
        What crowd is Slackware directed towards? I don't find it appealing at all.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by blackout23 View Post
          Well there aren't many distributions left. In case of Slackware I think that we'll rather see RMS using Microsoft Windows 8 on a Macbook than systemd being adopted as default init.
          Why? Even Gentoo now has systemd on equal footing with OpenRC. What makes Slackware so different?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by computerquip View Post
            What crowd is Slackware directed towards? I don't find it appealing at all.
            More or less the same target audience as gentoo, but who don't want to go to all of the trouble of building a gentoo installation, and/or want to do dependency resolution by hand.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by blackout23 View Post
              Well there aren't many distributions left. In case of Slackware I think that we'll rather see RMS using Microsoft Windows 8 on a Macbook than systemd being adopted as default init.
              Patrick have already talked about that Slackware would be using systemd if it was too much trouble not to adopt it. Some Slacker have already been working on systemd support for Slackware.

              It is only a matter of time before Slackware starts using the new de facto Linux plumbing system, partially because systemd is part of the future Linux development stack that everyone will develop against, partly because it seems unlikely that Slackware will ever get the help and manpower needed to develop an alternative to systemd.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by interested View Post
                Patrick have already talked about that Slackware would be using systemd if it was too much trouble not to adopt it. Some Slacker have already been working on systemd support for Slackware.

                It is only a matter of time before Slackware starts using the new de facto Linux plumbing system, partially because systemd is part of the future Linux development stack that everyone will develop against, partly because it seems unlikely that Slackware will ever get the help and manpower needed to develop an alternative to systemd.
                quote from the interview with PV on LQ that you are probably referencing

                "Concerning systemd, I do like the idea of a faster boot time (obviously), but I also like controlling the startup of the system with shell scripts that are readable, and I'm guessing that's what most Slackware users prefer too. I don't spend all day rebooting my machine, and having looked at systemd config files it seems to me a very foreign way of controlling a system to me, and attempting to control services, sockets, devices, mounts, etc., all within one daemon flies in the face of the UNIX concept of doing one thing and doing it well. "

                that does not go with what you stated

                slackware, the way i see it, is made to be simple and flexible
                (that is part of the "no dependency resolution" thing, even thou there are tools for it if you want)

                it is not about manpower either
                there is already an alternative to udev, and there will probably be to logind when they brake the api console-kit uses


                edit: PS it's not about politics either
                i doubt many slackers care about politics and popularity

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by gens View Post
                  quote from the interview with PV on LQ that you are probably referencing

                  "Concerning systemd, I do like the idea of a faster boot time (obviously), but I also like controlling the startup of the system with shell scripts that are readable, and I'm guessing that's what most Slackware users prefer too. I don't spend all day rebooting my machine, and having looked at systemd config files it seems to me a very foreign way of controlling a system to me, and attempting to control services, sockets, devices, mounts, etc., all within one daemon flies in the face of the UNIX concept of doing one thing and doing it well. "

                  that does not go with what you stated

                  slackware, the way i see it, is made to be simple and flexible
                  (that is part of the "no dependency resolution" thing, even thou there are tools for it if you want)

                  it is not about manpower either
                  there is already an alternative to udev, and there will probably be to logind when they brake the api console-kit uses


                  edit: PS it's not about politics either
                  i doubt many slackers care about politics and popularity
                  Here is part of the quote you left out (my emphasis):

                  "Yeah, I see a few things coming down the line that may cause a shakeup to our usual way of doing things, and could force Slackware to become, well, perhaps less UNIX-like. I guess the two big ones that are on the horizon are Wayland and systemd. Whether we end up using them or not remains to be seen. It's quite possible that we won't end up having a choice in the matter depending on how development that's out of our hands goes. It's hard to say whether moving to these technologies would be a good thing for Slackware overall. "
                  http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...ckware-949029/

                  Slackware will move in the same direction as every other Linux distro: Sysvinit and X are on minimum life support right now, with systemd and Wayland being the future of Linux. Patrick is perhaps sceptical, but Slackware is such a small distro that it won't have the manpower to even maintain status quo. There simply doesn't seem to be any developer impetus to maintain a full featured Sysvinit Linux distro. Maybe some Debian Sysvinit derivative will be made, but it will mostly be a server version, since DE support for non-systemd systems have been bit-rotting for years now.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Wayland is against Unix too now?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by interested View Post
                      Here is part of the quote you left out (my emphasis):

                      "Yeah, I see a few things coming down the line that may cause a shakeup to our usual way of doing things, and could force Slackware to become, well, perhaps less UNIX-like. I guess the two big ones that are on the horizon are Wayland and systemd. Whether we end up using them or not remains to be seen. It's quite possible that we won't end up having a choice in the matter depending on how development that's out of our hands goes. It's hard to say whether moving to these technologies would be a good thing for Slackware overall. "
                      http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...ckware-949029/

                      Slackware will move in the same direction as every other Linux distro: Sysvinit and X are on minimum life support right now, with systemd and Wayland being the future of Linux. Patrick is perhaps sceptical, but Slackware is such a small distro that it won't have the manpower to even maintain status quo. There simply doesn't seem to be any developer impetus to maintain a full featured Sysvinit Linux distro. Maybe some Debian Sysvinit derivative will be made, but it will mostly be a server version, since DE support for non-systemd systems have been bit-rotting for years now.
                      here's another part

                      "To the typical end user, if this results in a faster boot then mission accomplished. With udev being phased out in favor of systemd performing those tasks we'll have to make the decision at some point between whether we want to try to maintain udev ourselves, have systemd replace just udev's functions, or if we want the whole kit and caboodle. Wayland, by comparison, seems fairly innocuous, assuming that they'll be able to implement network transparency either directly or through some kind of add-on compatibility layer. Again, another thing that most desktop users don't have a lot of use for but many users can't do without. I like X11, and would probably stick with it if moving to Wayland meant losing that feature, even if Wayland's rendering method carried with it some benefits like reduced rendering artifacts or increased video performance. I guess we'll just have to see what the overall benefit is when it's far enough along to make such comparisons."

                      so udev
                      at the time of the interview (06.07.2012) there were not as many alternatives to upstream udev

                      later logind might be problematic, but there will probably be a good enough alternative (also systemd will release a stable API version, maybe)


                      slackware is not small and is kept quite up to date (newest alsa, gcc, firefox etc and last stable kernel, xorg etc.)
                      i suggest doing some research before assuming
                      more then that i suggest not putting things into other peoples mouths

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by xeekei View Post
                        Wayland is against Unix too now?
                        no, on the contrary
                        it does one thing and does it well

                        also interview was two years ago, wayland was fairly new then

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by gens View Post
                          here's another part

                          "To the typical end user, if this results in a faster boot then mission accomplished. With udev being phased out in favor of systemd performing those tasks we'll have to make the decision at some point between whether we want to try to maintain udev ourselves, have systemd replace just udev's functions, or if we want the whole kit and caboodle. Wayland, by comparison, seems fairly innocuous, assuming that they'll be able to implement network transparency either directly or through some kind of add-on compatibility layer. Again, another thing that most desktop users don't have a lot of use for but many users can't do without. I like X11, and would probably stick with it if moving to Wayland meant losing that feature, even if Wayland's rendering method carried with it some benefits like reduced rendering artifacts or increased video performance. I guess we'll just have to see what the overall benefit is when it's far enough along to make such comparisons."

                          so udev
                          at the time of the interview (06.07.2012) there were not as many alternatives to upstream udev

                          later logind might be problematic, but there will probably be a good enough alternative (also systemd will release a stable API version, maybe)


                          slackware is not small and is kept quite up to date (newest alsa, gcc, firefox etc and last stable kernel, xorg etc.)
                          i suggest doing some research before assuming
                          more then that i suggest not putting things into other peoples mouths
                          Slackware _is_ a small distro and I am not just talking user base and number of packages, but also in terms of developers. Nothing wrong in that, just a fact. It has been a niche distro for more than a decade (and yes, I have installed Slackware from floppies before that).

                          Regarding the fork of "udev" and "logind" then it is highly symptomatic for the lack of non-systemd development, that the only vaguely viable alternatives to systemd, are in fact forked systemd code made by Lennart Poettering and other systemd developers.

                          The "logind" fork is just a temporary band aid; it will stand still while upstream DE's start to develop features that aren't compatible with the old forked 204 version of systemd.
                          Then there is cgroups and kdbus etc. together with Wayland. It will become harder and harder not to support systemd on any full featured Linux distro. It isn't impossible, but there just doesn't seem to be that much developer interest in doing so.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by interested View Post
                            Slackware _is_ a small distro and I am not just talking user base and number of packages, but also in terms of developers. Nothing wrong in that, just a fact. It has been a niche distro for more than a decade (and yes, I have installed Slackware from floppies before that).

                            Regarding the fork of "udev" and "logind" then it is highly symptomatic for the lack of non-systemd development, that the only vaguely viable alternatives to systemd, are in fact forked systemd code made by Lennart Poettering and other systemd developers.

                            The "logind" fork is just a temporary band aid; it will stand still while upstream DE's start to develop features that aren't compatible with the old forked 204 version of systemd.
                            Then there is cgroups and kdbus etc. together with Wayland. It will become harder and harder not to support systemd on any full featured Linux distro. It isn't impossible, but there just doesn't seem to be that much developer interest in doing so.
                            so from your point of view there are only 3 big distros (ubuntu, debian, fedora and what comes of it)
                            since slackware is bigger then all the others (over 6%)

                            fork of udev shows that people think making a key part of linux tied into a specific boot system is dumb
                            and udev is a key part
                            and there was nothing wrong with it
                            Kay Sievers took maintainership of udev
                            Linus himself said it went to shit then
                            and no, nothing is changed in udev itself, it is there for systemd's benefit only

                            and yes, desktop people have a loooong history of not cooperating
                            that is their problem
                            i think it is 'cuz they all artistic and want to do their thing

                            it does not mean we should all praise GNOME for being dependent on systemd
                            funny enough the official reasoning is multiseat support, that you can't do without a network in systemd


                            cgroups are, as i become bored of repeating on phoronix, simple and easy
                            and in my opinion not that useful on the desktop, but that is my opinion

                            point is it can all be done with simple daemons
                            and yet systemd is being forced for no clear reason
                            Last edited by gens; 03-01-2014, 07:43 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by gens View Post
                              so from your point of view there are only 3 big distros (ubuntu, debian, fedora and what comes of it)
                              since slackware is bigger then all the others (over 6%)
                              Source? That's most definetly not true. Try openSUSE/SLE, RHEL/CentOS or Gentoo.

                              Originally posted by gens View Post
                              fork of udev shows that people think making a key part of linux tied into a specific boot system is dumb
                              No it doesn't. It only means that some people think so and the fact that no one, not even Gentoo has adopted eudev should tell you something about the importance of the project.

                              Originally posted by gens View Post
                              Kay Sievers took maintainership of udev
                              Linus himself said it went to shit then
                              and no, nothing is changed in udev itself, it is there for systemd's benefit only
                              Seriously what are you talking about? Greg K-H transfered the maintainership of udev to Kay Sievers in 2005

                              Kay has been instrumental in getting udev as
                              feature complete and stable and actually working well. Without his
                              help, it wouldn't be the program it is today. He also was the one who
                              implemented the persistant naming policy for disks, which is now in all
                              of the major Linux distributions (and a few minor ones.)

                              I'll still be around and doing minor work on udev, but Kay is the one
                              who is now in charge, and I know it is in good hands.
                              Also from the systemd/udev merge announcement:

                              Originally posted by Kay Sievers
                              We are about to merge the udev sources into the systemd source tree. After that, the next version of systemd will continue with udevís version numbering, i.e. jump immediately from 45 to 184.
                              Originally posted by Greg KH
                              Great job on this, it makes a lot of sense.
                              So the creator, original maintainer, second most active udev developer and the current maintainer and the most active developer, responsible for virtually all udev developement, both agreed that merging was the right choise. It has allowed a lot of code sharing between systemd which then again makes the maintanance of udev easier.

                              Originally posted by gens View Post
                              funny enough the official reasoning is multiseat support, that you can't do without a network in systemd
                              What....


                              Originally posted by gens View Post
                              and yet systemd is being forced for no clear reason
                              No one is forcing you to use systemd.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X