Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Debian To Switch To Systemd Or Upstart

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

  • Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    The udev maintainers joined systemd voluntarily, and that move was beneficial since it allows tighter coupling of systemd with udev in order to use all of the functionality in a cleaner way. If others don't like it, they can always use the Gentoo fork, if they're willing to maintain it.
    So they didn't create new features in this case, they bundled existing features and announced the plan to break all distros who don't use their software.

    Comment


    • fuck it

      I'm building right now a systemd version of Linux From Scratch and i realy doubt that it's going to be anymore complicated than using sysvinit

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Sergio View Post
        At least RCU and KMS are not Linux's innovations.

        BSD's: FFS (innovation at the time), TCP/IP protocol stack, job control, curses, vim, sockets, jails, pf, rumpkernel/anykernel, HAMMER FS, virtual kernels.
        Solaris' contributions are well-known.

        I know it is off topic, but getting pretty tired of you every time saying/suggesting everything but Linux is a piece of shit (i.e. Trolling).
        I know RCU and KMS existed, before they have arrived in Linux, but I said this in comparison to BSD and Solaris only. If you count things like vim and Hammer I can name most of the KDE and Gnome applications, because they were made for Linux and I can name many Linux file systems. However, it wasn't be interesting. TCP/IP, jobs, sockets are good examples, but they're not products of current BSD distributions, right? BSD and Solaris stopped to be innovating many years ago and they're stagnating.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
          I know RCU and KMS existed, before they have arrived in Linux, but I said this in comparison to BSD and Solaris only. If you count things like vim and Hammer I can name most of the KDE and Gnome applications, because they were made for Linux and I can name many Linux file systems. However, it wasn't be interesting. TCP/IP, jobs, sockets are good examples, but they're not products of current BSD distributions, right? BSD and Solaris stopped to be innovating many years ago and they're stagnating.
          Recently: ZFS and Dtrace for Solaris. Capsicum for FreeBSD, anykernel/rumpkernel for NetBSD. DragonFly BSD is in fact an entirely new approach in the design and development of an operating system (the most innovative in my opinion), that is why I mentioned Hammer and vkernels.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
            But systemd isn't just an init daemon, it's a service and setup manager.
            Yeah.
            X isn't just a display server, it's a toolkit, and a print server.

            Sure, good luck with that.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
              So they didn't create new features in this case, they bundled existing features and announced the plan to break all distros who don't use their software.
              Obviously not. It is just open source code. Ubuntu developers have commit access to systemd repository and continue to use pieces from systemd sources like udev and logind without using systemd as the init system. They may fork logind in the future but there is no force involved here.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by RahulSundaram View Post
                Obviously not. It is just open source code. Ubuntu developers have commit access to systemd repository and continue to use pieces from systemd sources like udev and logind without using systemd as the init system. They may fork logind in the future but there is no force involved here.
                Isn't it true that patches were turned down with the explanation to the tune of "not running systemd is antiquated"? If you can't work your patches upstream (necessary to make things like udev run on your distro), how is this productive?

                I mean, every distro maintaining a fork of systemd goes against the whole idea of "core OS", doesn't it?

                Comment


                • Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                  Isn't it true that patches were turned down with the explanation to the tune of "not running systemd is antiquated"?
                  I don't recall any Ubuntu patches turned down. Do you? If so, provide a reference.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Honton View Post
                    OpenRC = Ron Paul. Do everybody a favour and stop your campaign. This is only about systemd and Upstart.
                    OpenRC works well for Gentoo. Why do you call it capaign to say that the discussion misses a relevant system?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by RahulSundaram View Post
                      I don't recall any Ubuntu patches turned down. Do you? If so, provide a reference.
                      I seem to remember that it was one of the reasons for the eudev fork, but I can't be bothered to hunt that down.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X