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

  • Guest
    Guest replied
    If they decide to ditch the idea of supporting any other init, their distro will become even worse than it already is.

    Leave a comment:


  • pmorph
    replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    The same thing I said above also applies to Unix and Unix phylosophies.

    Actual applications care about OS APIs, and almost always there is no chance in hell that a developer can ask the OS developers to add or tweak the APIs.
    Yes, that's why you avoid adding any unnecessary restrictions.

    Leave a comment:


  • ermo
    replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    Actual non-systemd distros need all contributors and userbase they can get.
    Someone linked to the *BSD-originated nosh project in the last post on this subject.

    I have to admit that I wouldn't be surprised if nosh ended up being the proverbial holy grail for those who really don't like the way systemd is designed. From the front page of nosh:

    It's not systemd: This is a point in its own right, for some people. A rather more sensible point of view is that it's part of maintaining heterogeneity in Linux. systemd unit files do not lock one in to systemd forevermore, because one can run them through convert-systemd-units and get nosh service bundles. And nosh is part of a family of toolsets where mix-and-match composability is a design feature.
    Assuming that systemd and its units become the de facto standard for managing Linux systems going forward, it makes sense for upstream developers to ship a single set of service and configuration files targeting systemd, which keeps their testing surface as small as possible.

    With nosh's ability to convert (some?) systemd files, it should be trivial to maintain a system with nosh taking on the bulk of the conversion work. In theory at least.

    Nosh also has the interesting property that it is already tested on BSD. Thus, coalescing around nosh for the purposes of running Debian atop a FreeBSD kernel might be the sensible option.

    Note that I have no dog in the fight per se and it's been a long time since I used a Debian-derived distribution on bare metal. I maintain a couple of packages for Solus and have found the systemd facilities useful in that respect. In the past I've also helped maintain packages that relied on sysv rc-init scripts and debugging those when something went wrong was ... well, let's just say that systemd has allowed me to focus more on the packages and less on the intricacies of service management in bash.

    I also quite like the idea of the daemontools concept on which nosh is based and I hope that one of the (re-)implementations of that concept (i.e. nosh, s6, runit, daemontools-encore) rise to the top as a counterbalance to the impending systemd hegemony, because "competition improves the breed" as they say.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by archkde View Post

    If the result of this GR is that Debian stops support non-systemd inits, this will mean the immediate death of Devuan. No need to wait for two years then.
    The sooner, the better. Actual non-systemd distros need all contributors and userbase they can get.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by pmorph View Post
    That branch of the discussion started when someone insisted that "Unix and Unix-like philosophies should be ditched once and for all".
    The same thing I said above also applies to Unix and Unix phylosophies.

    Actual applications care about OS APIs, and almost always there is no chance in hell that a developer can ask the OS developers to add or tweak the APIs.

    Leave a comment:


  • archkde
    replied
    Originally posted by anarki2 View Post
    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.
    If the result of this GR is that Debian stops support non-systemd inits, this will mean the immediate death of Devuan. No need to wait for two years then.

    Leave a comment:


  • pmorph
    replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    The overwhelming amount of application developers aren't interacting with systemd at all (it's more a distro maintainer thing), so I'm not sure how this relates to the topic.
    That branch of the discussion started when someone insisted that "Unix and Unix-like philosophies should be ditched once and for all".

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by moilami View Post

    Yes they can, if that is the case.
    It seems very well to be.

    Leave a comment:


  • moilami
    replied
    Originally posted by jabl View Post

    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.
    Yes they can, if that is the case.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by pmorph View Post
    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.
    The overwhelming amount of application developers aren't interacting with systemd at all (it's more a distro maintainer thing), so I'm not sure how this relates to the topic.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X