Arch-Based Antergos Linux Distribution Calls It Quits

[Shiba]

100% of the times

«It's the others that don't understand!»

[bachchain]

instead something no one wanted was adopted, from a developer that has historically draw lots of ire, practically universally without consulting the users and against many of the developers as well. systemd is about as inelegant solution to the problems as could be imagined... plain launchd even would hae been better.

Funny how the distro maintainers (y'know, the guys that actually know what they're doing) almost universally disagree with you.

[ypnos]

You joined this forum in 2013 so I assume you never used old Arch... if you like new Arch that is fine, but it completely went about face in 2011-2012 and was no longer a distro I wanted to use *at all* as it did not respect my desires as a user.

Hey Mr. Gatekeeper. you joined this forum in 2009 so I assume you also never used old Arch. I use Arch now for 15 years, so I went through almost all of it. I can reassure you, Arch in 2019 is much better than Arch in 2009. Your personal hate for a person that does not deserve it has nothing to do with Arch Linux. II strongly suggest you go somewhere else to spread it, or just leave it.

[cb88]

Funny how the distro maintainers (y'know, the guys that actually know what they're doing) almost universally disagree with you.

Sure, after the systemd hoard ran everyone else off about 4 years ago...

[cb88]

Hey Mr. Gatekeeper. you joined this forum in 2009 so I assume you also never used old Arch. I use Arch now for 15 years, so I went through almost all of it. I can reassure you, Arch in 2019 is much better than Arch in 2009. Your personal hate for a person that does not deserve it has nothing to do with Arch Linux. II strongly suggest you go somewhere else to spread it, or just leave it.

Ok, so your 15 years vs my 12 years... frankly why should I care that you've been using it maybe 3 years longer?

Also here we have another hypocrite... that wants to "gatekeep" me as he puts it, that's rich.

[c2h5oh]

I guess it's fork time. Wish me luck :-)

[ThoreauHD]

Good.

[oiaohm]

systemd is about as inelegant solution to the problems as could be imagined... plain launchd even would hae been better.

This is a absolutely no. Launchd in fact depend on features of the Darwin OS kernel yes the BSD kernel has these features problem the Linux kernel does not.

Out of the BSD style process table you can generate two trees.
1)Started by tree what is exactly that what started X program
2) Kill path tree as in what processes should receive termination/kill signals if X program is sent a kill signal.
Linux kernel process table only in fact have number 2. You make something close to 1 by using cgroups. Basically launchd on Linux that worked correctly would basically be systemd core.

There has been a historic second difference that has made pidfile usage on Linux 100 percent sure race condition problem location.
https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/b...l/pkill.c#L317
Read this line you will notice kvm_openfiles this does exist on Linux.
https://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_5.1#...e_of_PID_reuse
This is above is really the start of the equal. Both result in opening file handles so that if a program goes away while lining up to kill it you don't kill some other unlucky process that reuses the PID number.

Cgroups have been a good work around to the fact you cannot use pidfile safely on Linux. We will not be able to use pidfile safely on Linux until pfile on linux distributions get updated to use safe signal delivery and are using newer than the 5.1 Linux kernel. Of course fixing this does not fix the problem of not having a tree of what started processes.

Systemd is really as closed to launchd you could get with the low level broken the Linux kernel had at the time launchd started.

[oiaohm]

I guess it's fork time. Wish me luck :-)

I will not wish you luck. Its really simple to start a distribution. Its a completely different problem to have enough funding/resources to maintain one.

If you think you need luck to maintain a fork of a distribution you might as well not attempt it now because you are most likely under resourced so are going to end up making another distribution that dies in time as you run out of resources. Yes the end result is you will end up harming end users.

Now instead of fork if you are under resourced have at look at dead distributions features and see if you can upstream those into the parent distribution or another better resourced distribution that you.

[theriddick]

Yeah I'm using antergos kde atm, the only problem I had during install was the repositories being very very slow or timing out (maybe they were under load, I dunno). But most the time its probably fine.
Anyway, hopefully nothing breaks once they remove that antergos repo, I really don't know why they didn't just use the normal arch ones to start with...