Debian Developers Decide On Init System Diversity: "Proposal B" Wins

[ThiagoCMC]

So, will Devuan die now?

"If the Proposal D by Ian Jackson will not pass, Devuan will die."

https://www.dyne.org/devuan-cannot-exist-without-the-help-of-debian/

What's next?

[Paul Frederick]

So are everyone yet they find a way to resolve problem. It seems complaining and flaming on a forum is much easier than reading a documentation. How do you learn to run sysvinit let alone using an operating system?


What was the the name of distribution used on that example and the command on which version of systemd? Could you provide the links of issue so other viewers can check your problem?


Yes, that is your job as system administration running a distribution whose developers set systemd as a system manager. Other posters attempt to help you to understand but you chose to ignore them because they don't fit your view. So yes, you are responsible and attempt to divert your own problem to someone else with your lack of cooperation. Unhappy? why not switching to another distribution or find another job?

Let's break your bullshit down and try to respond to each accusation you've made.

"So are everyone yet they find a way to resolve problem."

Oh I fixed it all long ago. Don't worry about that. It is the fact that I had to fix it that is salient.

"It seems complaining and flaming on a forum is much easier than reading a documentation. "

Not everything is as it seems. What a shocker there. Suffice to say you know nothing. You should proceed as if that is the case too. Making assumptions based on zero information is a good way to look stupid. Congratulations. You're an idiot. I did read the documentation! That's where I got the commands I used. I did not just randomly pull shit out of my ass like how you seem to operate. So quit projecting your inadequacies onto me.

"How do you learn to run sysvinit let alone using an operating system?"

How indeed have I gotten this far? I've been running Linux rather successfully now for over 24 years. Maybe I'm just an idiot savant? heh Or maybe I have shelves of books I've studied. What the fuck is the difference? Either way you questioning my competency is rude. So I'm just going to be rude right back to your wise ass. What comes around goes around.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

"What was the the name of distribution used on that example and the command on which version of systemd?"

To tell you the truth it was so long ago now I'd have to go into my notes to find out precisely which version I was running. It was over 3 years ago. It is not relevant. It has absolutely nothing to do with my initial statement in the context which I made it. In short you don't need to know. And it'd be a pain in the ass for me to even find out myself. You're not worth the effort. Sorry. But not really. /me breaks out the world's smallest violin... and proceeds to play a sad song on it.

"Other posters attempt to help you to understand but you chose to ignore them because they don't fit your view."

No I chose to ignore them because I was not looking for their help. Quite frankly I doubt if anyone here is in any position to help me even if that was my goal. I certainly wouldn't come here looking for help. I may be stupid but I'm not goofy. Instead I did the intelligent thing and filed bug reports in the appropriate place.

"So yes, you are responsible and attempt to divert your own problem to someone else with your lack of cooperation."

Being the responsible party I dealt with it. Responsibly, I may add.

"Unhappy?"

No. But thanks for asking.

"why not switching to another distribution or find another job?"

When the problem first manifested itself I did try out several other distributions. Unfortunately those efforts bore no fruit. So you've made an incorrect assumption that I did not pursue that avenue. I did. Always figure I'm a few steps ahead of you at all times and we should get along just fine. You won't be wrong most of the time either. Which would be light years ahead of where you are now. Don't take this the wrong way kid but you're not nearly as smart as you seem to think that you are. I can tell that just by examining the line of reasoning you attempt to pursue. Because I am that smart. Or so I've been told. With effort you may be able to overcome your deficiencies. But it'll be hard work. Good luck. We're done here now.

[jason.oliveira]

Dear Diary, Came back to the thread after the storm blew over. A bunch of genuine pseudonymous shills called me a shill while they tried to do damage control over SystemD's loss.

My point was proven 100%. No anti-SystemD comment will ever last as the final post in a thread.

[kpedersen]

Linux has evolved so much past UNIX that it is easily no long a UNIX, and it should continue that growth, not shy away from it.

This I actually agree with. For too long has Linux muddied the water of UNIX. I think systemd/Linux should be jettisoned and "allowed" to evolve however it wants.

I predict if it gets too far from UNIX philosophy however, it won't do well. Lets see

[finalzone]

Perhaps because I've other things I need to do. If a system that previously worked stops ceases to function properly when using systemd then what else could it possibly be?

So are everyone yet they find a way to resolve problem. It seems complaining and flaming on a forum is much easier than reading a documentation. How do you learn to run sysvinit let alone using an operating system?

Let's use a modicum of deductive reasoning here, shall we? I issue commands and they fail to execute. SystemD commands. Hmm, now what could it be?

What was the the name of distribution used on that example and the command on which version of systemd? Could you provide the links of issue so other viewers can check your problem?

I already invest too much time in system administration and your solution is for me to take on more responsibility? Yeah no, I don't think so.

Yes, that is your job as system administration running a distribution whose developers set systemd as a system manager. Other posters attempt to help you to understand but you chose to ignore them because they don't fit your view. So yes, you are responsible and attempt to divert your own problem to someone else with your lack of cooperation. Unhappy? why not switching to another distribution or find another job?

[Paul Frederick]

just like unix was an hobby OS: unix never was an hobby OS, but it was the industry standard for decades

When Ken and Dennis first made UNIX it was just so they could play Space War! Which sounds like a pretty trivial pursuit to me. I grew up in the same town Dennis did so I used to see him around all the time. He only moved a town away. We shopped at the same grocery store. The A&P in Murray Hill. Down the road from the Labs. He was a total space case!

[Paul Frederick]

Why not building your own distribution based on Linux from Scratch or using operating system like Alpine, Void or Gentoo rather than complaining on Debian developers chosing systemd as the main service management for Linux kernel? We are talking about core components. On other topic, you carefully avoid answering an trivial question thus refusing an help because you knew your issue had nothing do with systemd.

Perhaps because I've other things I need to do. If a system that previously worked stops ceases to function properly when using systemd then what else could it possibly be? Let's use a modicum of deductive reasoning here, shall we? I issue commands and they fail to execute. SystemD commands. Hmm, now what could it be? I already invest too much time in system administration and your solution is for me to take on more responsibility? Yeah no, I don't think so. IBM isn't paying me a salary. They pay Lennart though.

[Ironmask]

For anyone that was actually AROUND back then and used them, they were extremely usable and widely used. Why? Because unlike today most computers and operating systems came with EXTENSIVE written dead tree manuals that explained how everything worked down to pinouts and circuit diagrams. Ditto for the operating system, firmware interfaces, and any built in or purchased compilers and interpreters. My C-64 came with a manual that explained the board expansion ports, their use, pinouts, and registers. It also detailed how to write programs for the built in BASIC interpreter, described system registers, etc. All of the higher end systems came with both digital and dead tree documentation in multiple volumes describing most of the functionality. The man pages on Unix systems was extensive and generally accurate. So yes, these systems were extremely "usable"!

So stop trolling about usability when you're comparing apples to oranges. These days most computers come with bupkiss and you're expected to "figure it out". It's really no wonder general purpose computing is in the shape it is these days, because no one knows how anything works, and yes this includes Linux with it's usually out of date, missing, or inaccurate "documentation" - and no code never does and never will "document itself". That's a trope for lazy programmers that don't want to write proper documentation.

I... agree with you? That's exactly why I like systemd, if there's any issues I have with a service it's usually just a simple look at the systemd documentation on what command to run. Not quite sure where the defensiveness is coming from, I think we're on the same page.
But I was talking about AIX and CP/M from a software usability standpoint. As in, try using modern productivity software on those systems, or even writing/porting modern productivity software on them. You'll find many roadblocks, and not just because the modern standard is "different", it's because so many new and usable APIs were added. You're hard pressed to even find a piece of software that doesn't depend on GNOME/KDE libraries anymore.

[stormcrow]

Go ahead and install AIX/386 and tell me how usable that is.

Actually, Install CP/M and tell me how usable that is. That was THE desktop standard.

For anyone that was actually AROUND back then and used them, they were extremely usable and widely used. Why? Because unlike today most computers and operating systems came with EXTENSIVE written dead tree manuals that explained how everything worked down to pinouts and circuit diagrams. Ditto for the operating system, firmware interfaces, and any built in or purchased compilers and interpreters. My C-64 came with a manual that explained the board expansion ports, their use, pinouts, and registers. It also detailed how to write programs for the built in BASIC interpreter, described system registers, etc. All of the higher end systems came with both digital and dead tree documentation in multiple volumes describing most of the functionality. The man pages on Unix systems was extensive and generally accurate. So yes, these systems were extremely "usable"!

So stop trolling about usability when you're comparing apples to oranges. These days most computers come with bupkiss and you're expected to "figure it out". It's really no wonder general purpose computing is in the shape it is these days, because no one knows how anything works, and yes this includes Linux with it's usually out of date, missing, or inaccurate "documentation" - and no code never does and never will "document itself". That's a trope for lazy programmers that don't want to write proper documentation.

[Ironmask]

When CP/M was THE desktop standard. Do you even know what the alternative was?

CP/M was not UNIX btw...



You do know that AIX/386 was discontinued in 1995 right? It has since been obsoleted (many times) by AIX 7.2 (POWER only) released 1 month ago. You are very out of date.

You are so out of date, you probably think "Microsoft" is the only way.

Please go out and buy some newer books! haha

No, I know these are out of date standards. That was my retort, calling UNIX a viable standard is equal to calling CP/M a viable standard. Linux has evolved so much past UNIX that it is easily no long a UNIX, and it should continue that growth, not shy away from it.
Are you still mad because I said one programming language became more popular than another? You don't need to hold a grudge. I knew I shouldn't have hurt your feelings.