Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Debian Moves Closer To Voting On Proposals Over Init System Diversity

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

  • #11
    Originally posted by edwaleni View Post
    Let the religion begin on init methodology. 30+ posts on dogma alone. Meanwhile most desktop Linux users don't really care.
    Ok. Users don't care and developers(?) do. So what? It's not like the only religious war on solutions.

    Comment


    • #12
      Optional systemd at the bottom would be amazing. It could open the door to incorporating features from Devuan so everything systemd becomes optional, which hopefully would lead to looser coupling to the systemd universe on Debian and Ubuntu. I appreciate any resistance to everything inevitably falling into tight coupling with pieces of the systemd universe.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by willbprog177 View Post
        I am NOT a fan of systemd, and since Debian has made it the default, I have had some minor problems here and there, but, now that Debian is pretty much a systemd distro, I think they should just leave it as-is. Folks like me who prefer a non-systemd init can go elsewhere and not distract or upset an already busy project like Debian.
        Wow, you're the first person (which doesn't like systemd) I saw who actually think about the people doing the work. While there is stuff that works pretty well on Debian, stuff like updating xorg or DEs takes ages even in unstable. Debian's package approach is already not easy, making it more complicated with people wanting non-systemd support (which you often don't even have upstream) is not helpful. There's Devuan or Void (or many others) for that.
        I also don't get why the alternatives aren't able to write a compatibilty layer to convert systemd service/socket files to their concept. It can't be that hard, and if it is that means there's a good reason that we have systemd^^

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by stormcrow View Post

          You do realize you just described every Unix and Unix-like that's ever been created? Ah the engineer's toolbox: duct tape, bailing wire, and bubble gum. Unix embodies it well.
          That's exactly right and it's the reason why Unix and Unix-like philosophies should be ditched once and for all.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by 9Strike View Post
            I also don't get why the alternatives aren't able to write a compatibilty layer to convert systemd service/socket files to their concept. It can't be that hard, and if it is that means there's a good reason that we have systemd^^
            Because those that want it rather spend their time ranting on the internet and making up mad conspiracy theories involving Lennart Poettering than actually doing any work.
            Last edited by jabl; 11-17-2019, 05:07 AM.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by jacob View Post

              That's exactly right and it's the reason why Unix and Unix-like philosophies should be ditched once and for all.
              No. Like someone said this is relevant diversity talk. What I liked the most in Linux systems in the beginning was that I had the choice, there was real diversity. In Windows I had very little choice when compared. I was locked down. It is widely accepted that consumers want choices and enjoy of choices. For example even car manufacturers offer choices inside the same model. It is factory customization, but some make choices even after that and mod their cars and computers and what not a lot. The age of T-Ford is long gone.

              Also it seems Debian has forgot, among many other things, what their social contracts say.

              4. Our priorities are our users and free software

              https://www.debian.org/social_contract.en.html

              That has been grossly forgotten.

              Note that I am happy personally with systemd.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by stormcrow View Post

                You do realize you just described every Unix and Unix-like that's ever been created? Ah the engineer's toolbox: duct tape, bailing wire, and bubble gum. Unix embodies it well.
                Lol no that's not like that. Being modular does not automatically mean kept together by duct tape (shell script).

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by coder View Post
                  I think it's almost too late to rip out systemd. The biggest problem with it is that it's a blob that's slowly eating all of the userspace facilities and system functionality.
                  Not a blob, but a bunch of daemons, see below for list

                  That's my main gripe with it - that it defies the concept of modularity. They should've focused on standardizing a set of interfaces, so that different services could be swapped out for various duties.
                  Yes they have done so, and nearly all are covered by a "stability" pact since a long time ago
                  https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Sof...tabilityChart/

                  Instead, we're now forced with an all-or-nothing proposition. If given the freedom to choose the bits I want, I might even opt for many of systemd's components. But, that's what's missing - the freedom to choose.
                  Sorry what? You can mix and match every daemon.

                  I don't hate systemd.
                  Yes you do, pretty much all your post is sugar-coated bullshit, there is no other plausible explanation.

                  If they'd focused on the userspace system architecture and not tried to implement everything themselves, maybe they would've been even more successful in their goals.
                  To change the system architecture you must control the core system components, duh.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by moilami View Post
                    Also it seems Debian has forgot, among many other things, what their social contracts say.

                    4. Our priorities are our users and free software

                    https://www.debian.org/social_contract.en.html

                    That has been grossly forgotten.
                    There's certainly value in having choice and diversity, all else being equal. But in reality, all else is never equal. Debian might very well decide that their users and free software are better served by having one well working, supported and documented init system rather than 27 poorly working ones.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by Hibiki Kanzaki View Post
                      Optional systemd at the bottom would be amazing. It could open the door to incorporating features from Devuan so everything systemd becomes optional, which hopefully would lead to looser coupling to the systemd universe on Debian and Ubuntu. I appreciate any resistance to everything inevitably falling into tight coupling with pieces of the systemd universe.
                      More bullshit from non-developer people.

                      an init system is a core system component, not something you can have as an option within a distro, if you want to use a different init, use a different distro.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X