Debian To Seek A General Resolution Over Their Init System Policy

[jo-erlend]

I write it as "SystemD" on purpose these days, just because it annoys the prigs that go around admonishing people for it.

It's quite natural to tend to capitalize abbreviations like "D" and the only "imbeciles" here are the cud chewing cheerleaders that don't know much else beyond installing their distribution's packages, that think they have an opinion.

No, it's not natural to capitalize it like that in our community. However, the systemd developers specifically said the "d" was _not_ to be used in the sense of daemon, but that it should be called System D. Whether they were just joking or not, I don't know, but it seems odd for them to be annoyed at people who were confused by their decision to confuse them.

[Britoid]

No, it's not natural to capitalize it like that in our community. However, the systemd developers specifically said the "d" was _not_ to be used in the sense of daemon, but that it should be called System D. Whether they were just joking or not, I don't know, but it seems odd for them to be annoyed at people who were confused by their decision to confuse them.

It literally says on the systemd website that it's systemd and not System D and the d stands for daemon.

https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/

I don't see how there can be any confusion about the name.

[Ardje]

If the X Server goes down, your session is gone with it. The window manager doesn't hold the session.

If the window manager crashes, your X- session still lives on. And that really is a life saver. Which brings us to wayland... if the compositor dies (which is kinda like the X-server, and window manager in one), everything is gone.
Therefore, for POS systems I really only use a simple well known working bug free window manager: fvwm2 .
Although from performance and therefore lower cost of SoC, I am looking at wayland too. But what simplified compositor can I use that provides speed as well as rotation, but also stability. Samsung uses enlightenment, and they have years of experience with stable wayland.

[blackiwid]

The entitlement of the anti-systemd users that send zero patched but expect others is really annoying.

And fine you are so toxic that you reach your goal and for 1 minute you annoy people, goal reached. Yet this people will then do their live and use and support the next 5 years systemd exclusively completely forget about you and maybe come to such a forum topic in 5 years again, and then the game repeats. Is that really so satisfying to get zero done ever but annoy some people for 5 mins? I mean 1 even admitted that he writes systemd wrong just to get people annoyed.

So being complete looser reaching zero goals but get some people annoyed for 5 minutes that is your live goal? Ok... if that makes you happy... we survive it.

What I also find strange is the consistency, I have sometimes a bad day and make a rant about a current problem, and I go to far but then I move on either I fix the problem or choose something else. If I hold long grudges then more about evilness which means licences companies that screw up others not about technical different opinions.

So I dislike as example that fedora don't have a lts version or something alike, do I spam forums about it? No, I just stop using it when the pain get's to big. Heck I even talk still positive about them.

I do not use gnome anymore because it doesn't fit my usecase anymore but so does no "desktop" only let's call em "programmable window managers" or maybe tiling-wms do the trick for me, but gnome-shell changed my perspective about some desktop metaphors and for some users a tiling-wm is not the way to go, so go gnome go.

Or take Nixos what I am using, sure I get sometimes frustrated about as example their decision to have a stupid configuration language that I disagree on, that combined with often very long response times to bugs (months) sure but I make rant that they have to replace their build / configuration system because I find it dumb? No, I can work around my problems and the advantages of the distro are bigger than this 1 thing which has 1000x bigger implications than the init/logging system.

It's good enough and if the guix system not goes completely nuts on Richard Stallman hate on gnu-websites eventually in 5 years when they finally implement lvm support I probably will switch

And if I would care enough to get so annoyed that I would write 1000 comments about how Nix configuration language sucks I would probably write a lisp compiler that compiles lisp code into that crazy nix language instead.

[Ardje]

Personally I think systeMd is all right. I have not actually found it to be any better or worse than init scripts to the average power user... basic users will never know the difference and quite frankly should never have to choose between systeMd or inIt.

One of the basic users had to disturb me because his system was in a booting loop, and that's because systemd can't grok /etc/fstab.
When something is in there it cannot understand, it just reboots. It does not give the user an opportunity to pound some sense into systemd, or edit the system.
Fortunately it takes 60s or so to decide to reboot and somehow I could log into his system using ipv6 link local (because he already disabled network manager fortunately so it wouldn't break ipv6), and fix his fstab in that 60s between the boots.
The problem really is: what he did was correct. It's just that systemd thought differently.

Power users however will have the greatest problem trying to do some basic name resolving thanks to systemd-resolver, since it basically puts in a bogus nameserver in resolv.conf after which all DNS functionality as is standardized doesn't work anymore.
If you want to use things like dig, you need to stop systemd-resolved and disable it for life.
The bugs are known and are not going to be fixed BTW, because it was not intended as a valid nameserver. Then why put it in the resolv.conf in the first place... That's what's nsswitch.conf is for.

[blackiwid]

btw there would be more low hanging fruit to fix in nixos, as a start guix is able to install a guix package as separate with somethnig like "guix install --file program.lisp", while as far as I know the only way to change/test new packages in nixos is to fork their 10GB package repository and have a local fork of it, and then give 10km long params to use this local version.

Heck if we talk about their tooling and selecting different profiles is also badly done. But the more powerful and feature-full a backend is the crappier the tools are apparently

[jo-erlend]

It literally says on the systemd website that it's systemd and not System D and the d stands for daemon.

https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/

I don't see how there can be any confusion about the name.

Past tense. Years ago, I think it was the RedHat CEO that explained that the D is not for daemon and doesn't mean anything, and that the name should be System D. As I said, I don't know if it was supposed to be some kind of insider joke or something. It's good that they've now clarified what it means. When I first read about systemd, I assumed it was supposed to be used the normal way. I started using "System D" out of respect for Red Hat.

[starshipeleven]

Pls do systemd only. User who don't want to use systemd are using Void or Devuan anyway.

Devuan will die pretty quick if Debian truly becomes systemd-only.

They are barely able to ship a customized Debian, they won't be able to maintain init scripts for all Debian packages themselves.

[Britoid]

Devuan will die pretty quick if Debian truly becomes systemd-only.

They are barely able to ship a customized Debian, they won't be able to maintain init scripts for all Debian packages themselves.

Didn't they destroy all their build infrastructure because of a silly Aprils fools day joke?

No one should trust a distro with that level of incompetence, imagine if Debian or Fedora did something like that.

[L_A_G]

How was the implementation botched?

Why is the implementation bodged?

I know this is a very lame way to respond to something, but me and many others have explained exactly what we take issue with so many times over and over again that I just don't have the energy go into any detail. It's the same thing with 9/11 truthers as nobody really has the energy to go into any kind of detail to explain for the n:th time that you don't need to literally melt metals to significantly weaken them and thus the "Jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel so it had to be a controlled demolition"-argument is long since debunked.

The basic gist of what people take issue with in systemD is that is's a functionally monolithic rat's nest of unstable internal APIs with a massive case of feature creep and a plainly managed by people whose attitude to user feedback and even bug reports can only be described as toxic. There's numerous cases of them trying to brush off legitimate bug reports as "harassment" and just plain refusing to accept a bug report because it doesn't crash or break anything in the use case the reporter discovered it.

Would you please write it systemd. It's not systemD or SystemD but systemd. Thank you!

If you're going to use a naming convention where you take an english language word, tack on something the end and then write it all in lower case you can be damn sure people will want to have at least some kind of separation between that english language word and what's been tacked on. That being either a space or starting the tacked on bit with an upper case letter.

So would you prefer I wrote it "System D", "system d" or "systemD"?

imbeciles who can't spell systemd properly feel entitled to judge its implementation

Considering you know damn well I capitalize the D on purpose, as I've told you this multiple times when you've moaned about it, this just reminds me of the famous Confucius quote:

"When a wise man points at the moon the imbecile stares at the finger".