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

  • anarki2
    replied
    Haha, finally the dust starts to settle. The systemd-phobes tried to convince the whole world there's an impending doom if we dump the alternatives. Unfortunately that doom just failed to come. We all switched to systemd without anyone ever noticing anything. Not that it wasn't obvious. An init system isn't something that users care about. Or should care about, for that matter. It's really not in their realm. Much like no one cared when Debian switched to eglibc. Or when they moved back to glibc. I mean who cares, I'm using Firefox, not systemd. Or glibc. Or whatever cherry picked part in the toolchain having absolutely no impact on my work.

    At this point it's just a matter of time before this kind of tomfoolery dies off. I give Devuan maybe another 2 years before giving up due to lack of interest and resources. Good riddance.

    Leave a comment:


  • pmorph
    replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    Lol no that's not like that. Being modular does not automatically mean kept together by duct tape (shell script).
    Then again, you don't want to create a framework that makes developers look elsewhere, just to avoid a year long discussion with a committee to support their use case.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    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.
    Unix phylosophy isn't what systemd haters think it is. Systemd project is much more close to unix phylosophy than relying on scripts controlling dumb tool applications ever was.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by coder View Post
    Even if you don't expect the discussion to be worthwhile, I fail to see how this is remotely constructive. If you don't have anything useful to say and you're so certain this will be a waste of time, why did you even click on the comments link, let alone decide to post?
    As a disclaimer, a warning to others.

    What matters is the opinions of admins, maintainers, developers, and others who have to deal a lot with systemd or its alternatives.
    Which is the main reason most distros made the switch.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • jabl
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    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).

    Leave a comment:


  • moilami
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • jabl
    replied
    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; 17 November 2019, 05:07 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X