Devuan: Debian Without Systemd

[SebastianB]

rpi is a computer while pemtium is a one part of it. you should add other parts and divide by 60% psu

Actually missed that reply. In addition to your point in my country kwh is closer to 30 cents than to 10 cents ...

That being said ... what the HELL! Pentium isn't ancient hardware!! I was talking about some real server like a AlphaServer or something running netware 3.x with 5 1/4 inch hardrive ... or maybe a nice AS/400 pilfered from an abandoned school ...

Anything thats "always on but hardly in use" like a homeserver should use as little energy as possible. Rule of thumb, if it needs active cooling or a big radiator your wasting energy. Normally im not the kind of guy who cares what you do with your money, but its just so horribly inefficent that it makes me cringe and try to appeal to reason. Its ... wrong. Twisted. Evil.

[ryao]

Peer pressure is not something that you can perscribe intent to, it doesn't ever "mean" to do anything. However that being said, there is a natural resistance to forking in the community because if a fork is going to be sucessfull it does mean taking resources away from the original project. Developers are not infinite.

Whenever I see such behavior, I think that such people should not have made their software open source. The principles of open source software do not permit this. Employing peer pressure to circumvent the idea that people should be able to reuse the sources is a disgrace.

I'm still unclear on what exactly you say these people were saying, I don't see why you'd bring this up if you're not willing to it up with examples. I'm not willing to take it as true on face value, and nobody else should either.

It is my perspective. You are right that no one can verify it. Everyone has a different perspective. If you look on these forums alone, you will find plenty of people who think absurd things. Not telling people what I think would be dishonest. Whether or not you believe it is up to you.

no, sysvinit camp is mostly comprised of same assholes who were in miserably failed eudev camp

This is yet another example of boorish behavior from systemd proponents. That said, there are multiple criteria for success. The only criteria that eudev has is to stop systemd's developers from breaking the eudev developers' systems as well as anyone else interested in running it. It has been a marvelous success by this regard. eudev is basically what would have been Gentoo's udev had there not been disagreements with the present Gentoo udev maintainers about package maintenance. Your criteria seems to be marketshare and quite frankly, while marketshare is nice, it was never the goal.

I didn't "twist your words". I directly quoted them. Here's a hint: when your own words quoted back to you look so bad that you have to accuse someone of "twisting" them, you're not doing too well in the argument.

Here's those twisted words again, folks:

"From my perspective, the systemd camp is mostly comprised of an end users who are vulnerable to hype and less experienced developers while the sysvinit camp is mostly compromised of system administrators and veteran developers."

That's what you said, right there. If you were only talking about developers of different levels of ability, perhaps that's what you should have written.

That is what I said, but I did not say that those deciding technical direction are end users. I also did not say that they are solely inexperienced. There is a mix. Experience levels will naturally vary. Saying "the people who decide the technical direction of Debian, SUSE, Fedora, RHEL, Ubuntu, Mageia and multiple other distros are 'end users who are vulnerable to hype and less experienced developers'" is to twist what I said. The problem appears to be that I did not express what I meant in a manner that you understood. Unfortunately, everyone is different and any meaningful communication requires meeting people halfway. Making jeering remarks instead of honestly requesting clarification helps no one.

That said, here is a general remark. I am somewhat worn out by various follow-up posts, especially the jeering follow-up post that AdamW made after this. I wrote up my thoughts. I made reasonable attempts to clarify them. People are requesting clarification of the clarification and then clarification of the clarification of the clarification, mainly on the basis that they cannot agree to disagree. If there is something you do not understand, re-read what I already said or better yet, do you own research. The only exception is tomegun, with whom I would be more than happy to continue this conversation via email. He is the *only* reasonable person that I have encountered here.

[psychoticmeow]

He is the *only* reasonable person that I have encountered here.

You talk about being reasonable, but your position isn't reasoned with logic but with emotion instead.

[AdamW]

That said, here is a general remark. I am somewhat worn out by various follow-up posts, especially the jeering follow-up post that AdamW made after this. I wrote up my thoughts. I made reasonable attempts to clarify them. People are requesting clarification of the clarification and then clarification of the clarification of the clarification, mainly on the basis that they cannot agree to disagree. If there is something you do not understand, re-read what I already said or better yet, do you own research. The only exception is tomegun, with whom I would be more than happy to continue this conversation via email. He is the *only* reasonable person that I have encountered here.

Well. Honestly? Sometimes I come to Phoronix just to blow off a bit of steam, because I can come here and be a bit blunt and still not be in any danger of lowering the usual tone of debate.

But it really, genuinely, honestly gets on my nerves when someone who's clearly intelligent enough to string together long paragraphs of words in a reasonable-sounding tone so obstinately refuses to provide details, facts, references - anything to get a grasp on. It's just all assertions without support, shapeless generalities and cod design philosophy, it's just honestly tiresome. It's not a question of wanting you to clarify things, it's a question of wanting you to support and justify them properly, which I really genuinely don't think you're doing a very good job of at all.

[nanonyme]

it is not lock-in. lock-in is when you can't move out. all gcc extensions were documented and source was available, so llvm had no problems implementing them

Eh, they actually had such trouble implementing those that significant part of the effort has been moving code to a more standard shape like, you know, c89 and c99. It's just as much a lock-in as it has been that Windows programs end up being written against msvc extensions. Library calls can fairly easily be abstracted (eg libsystemd) but if the code doesn't compile at all, that is a real problem. The current solution is assuming gcc and glibc will always be available for all platforms and as far as that's true, the lock-in won't hurt anyone.

[curaga]

Actually missed that reply. In addition to your point in my country kwh is closer to 30 cents than to 10 cents ...

That being said ... what the HELL! Pentium isn't ancient hardware!! I was talking about some real server like a AlphaServer or something running netware 3.x with 5 1/4 inch hardrive ... or maybe a nice AS/400 pilfered from an abandoned school ...

Anything thats "always on but hardly in use" like a homeserver should use as little energy as possible. Rule of thumb, if it needs active cooling or a big radiator your wasting energy. Normally im not the kind of guy who cares what you do with your money, but its just so horribly inefficent that it makes me cringe and try to appeal to reason. Its ... wrong. Twisted. Evil.

21 years old computer hw isn't ancient to you (Pentium debuted 1993)? I suppose that's a difference of opinion then. I agree the power usage of old alphas/sparcs is enormous, remember the OpenBSD news here about their electricity costs.

@pal666

I have you blacklisted, but someone happened to quote you. The 20W is for the whole system.

[AJSB]

Yes the point was that Debian and Ubuntu already weren't using the same init system, so Debian didn't force anything on Ubuntu. Instead it was already getting too difficult for them to maintain compatibility with upstream software, and Debian switching over to systemd was the last straw before they gave up and said "Well this is too much work, everyone else is going with systemd so we're going to switch."

I disagree...your point just reinforces all that i said in this thread...when Debian voted, the choice was between systemd, Upstart, or, IIRC, stay as it was.
If Debian decided go with Upstart or stay as it was no way in hell UBUNTU would have gone with systemd and same goes to all Debian & UBUNTU derivates.

UBUNTU didn't choose systemd. It was a choice imposed to UBUNTU by Debian.

At most, if Debian had choose stay as they were, UBUNTU had abandon Upstart and gone back to same init than Debian is using up to now.

Like i said previously, upstream decides and all derivates sooner or later "get with the program".

More than 90% of distros are actually derivates.

Only a handfull of distros "lead the way":
RHEL, Debian and Slackware (yes, there is a significant of small distros based on Slackware) are the main ones (Fedora doesn't count because is itself a distant derivate from RHEL), sure, there are some more independent distros like Mageia but how many distros are derivate from Mageia or OpenSUSE ? Far less than from Slackware.

These are the 3 main branches, NOT in the number of PCs running them but in the number of derivates from them, therefore, their influence in the Linux ecosystem is HUGE.

With the Debian vote victory , systemd got a enormous step in Linux *consumer Desktop* (RHEL being more to Server but , granted, some of their derivates like Fedora are consumer desktop oriented), a influence that it didn't had before.

[BlackStar]

I disagree...your point just reinforces all that i said in this thread...when Debian voted, the choice was between systemd, Upstart, or, IIRC, stay as it was.

You remember incorrectly.

The choice was between systemd, upstart, openrc, sysvinit and further discussion (FD). All 8 CTTE members voted that *any* alternative would be better than staying with sysvinit. In other words, sysvinit was considered as the worst possible option for Debian.

In the end, the vote was split 4/4 between systemd and upstart, with 7 out of 8 remarking that either systemd or upstart would be a valid technical choice for Debian. This includes the 3 Canonical employees. The last CTTE member was dogmatically opposed to systemd and prolonged the debate for months trying to influence the vote. When that failed, he attempted to raise a General Resolution (GR) and when *that* failed he resorted to misusing the CTTE process to attack various Debian developers indirectly.

This charade continued for almost 12 months, causing immeasurable damage to the project and resulting in resignations from various prominent Debian developers.

In the end, a GR *overwhelmingly* voted in favor of systemd letting this issue rest once and for all.

[xeekei]

I would also like to respectfully ask people to stop quoting the trolls, please! Have a nice day.

[scjet]

Phoronix: Devuan: Debian Without Systemd

Last month we wrote about a group of administrations planning to fork Debian GNU/Linux over not liking its direction due to adopting systemd over Upstart or SysVInit. The Debian administrators have made good on their word and announced the Devuan fork of Debian...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTg1MDQ

well, https://devuan.org/ is a reality all because of what ?
The corporate systemd mission-creep of IBM/Redhat/Gnome pushing their "Windowsization-of-Linux" agenda to the point that now even that will "break" apart.
So, how do you all like your Poetterix-OS now ?!