Gentoo Gets GNOME 3.30 Running Without Systemd

[Raka555]

I've not heard of Alpine Linux, thank you. I'll keep that in mind. I read a little about it and it sounds pretty cool.

busybox is a bit lite for my taste, but you can replace most of it with a simple "apk add util-linux" command

Isn't choice a wonderful thing ...

[aht0]

I've not heard of Alpine Linux, thank you. I'll keep that in mind. I read a little about it and it sounds pretty cool.

Void Linux has musl-based variant, if you were looking for desktop-oriented build. Alpine's user's niche seems to be vm's.

[aht0]

For those commenting on UNIX Philosophies, are there any major BSDs in development that do not use a single repo for most development?

Systemd seems to follow this UNIX philosophy more closely than most linux components which are often more independently developed.

Nope, OpenBSD, NetBSD, DragonFly, FreeBSD have all their own separate code repositories.

[aht0]

GNU/Linux distros are not like the BSDs (FreeBSD & OpenBSD etc). GNU/Linux distros are more of a bazaar compared to the BSDs.

Due to systemd it's becoming reverse. You'll find more differences between 4 BSD's + handful of derivatives than between most Linux distros. Most Linuces are going 'with the the flow' and exist in the limits systemd has mandated them. Not to mention wide majority being 'off-shoots' of bigger mother distros and not actually original creations themselves.

Little oddball-distros, the really different ones and potentially interesting - have to spend much of their limited developer-hours working things out around systemd. Which hurts them bad because they might not be get noticed before giving up out of frustration.

[F.Ultra]

The problem with systemd has nothing to do with the functionality it provides.

The real problem is freedom. They are taking away your freedom bit by bit.

Systemd can't run on any c-library but glibc. Already your freedom to use musl, diet-libc, u-clibc etc are taken away from you.

Why would you care about other libc libraries than glibc ? Ask die Docker people how much bloat they shed going from glibc to musl-libc as just 1 example.

Systemd is making the problem worse by assimilating more and more services into systemd.

The Gentoo people are fighting for your freedom and many people can't even recognize they are under thread ...

Because people should just ignore those nice extra functionalities of glibc and only use the ones exposed by what-ever-libc alternative that exposes the least amounts of functions?

[F.Ultra]

Due to systemd it's becoming reverse. You'll find more differences between 4 BSD's + handful of derivatives than between most Linux distros. Most Linuces are going 'with the the flow' and exist in the limits systemd has mandated them. Not to mention wide majority being 'off-shoots' of bigger mother distros and not actually original creations themselves.

Little oddball-distros, the really different ones and potentially interesting - have to spend much of their limited developer-hours working things out around systemd. Which hurts them bad because they might not be get noticed before giving up out of frustration.

Just wait until you discover X11, or say GNOME.

[Britoid]

Just wait until you discover X11, or say GNOME.

I wouldn't be surprised if there's a huge overlap in the people that complain about both systemd and wayland.

[jacob]

We actually don't really care if there is an init system at all. Our problem with systemd is mostly that it does too many things, thus violating the Unix philosophy and in an abstract way the S in SOLID development. Restructure systemd in separate modular utilities and I won't have a problem with it any more.

Here we go again. Systemd is already a collection of modular utilities. No, there is no single giant executable called "systemd".

As for yhe Unix philosophy, I dare say that syatemd has been so successful precisely BECAUSE it throws it away.

[F.Ultra]

I wouldn't be surprised if there's a huge overlap in the people that complain about both systemd and wayland.

Oh yes there are plenty, that was not my argument however. ath0 compained that systemd makes Linux distros mere clones of each other (which of course is a false premise considering how small a percentage the systemd utilities are of all the default installed utilities on a normal Linux distro) when things like X11 or Gnome makes all Linux and BSD systems look and behave 100% identical across the board for most casual users.

[aht0]

Oh yes there are plenty, that was not my argument however. ath0 compained that systemd makes Linux distros mere clones of each other (which of course is a false premise considering how small a percentage the systemd utilities are of all the default installed utilities on a normal Linux distro) when things like X11 or Gnome makes all Linux and BSD systems look and behave 100% identical across the board for most casual users.

Say, give them same package managers, same artwork and there's the end of your difference. Limited to amount of DE's and 3rd-party apps thrown in.

For some, like OpenSUSE, Gentoo or Solus, I do here great injustice, because they have lots of custom coding in'em BUT most 'distros' are nothing but customized mods to their parent-distro.
With BSD's - first you have to set your system up yourself. It's DIY like some Linux distros. Noob does not see any differences beyond console, sure let me write it up for a good boy.

FreeBSD - general purpose, good network stack, native ZFS since rel.7
OpenBSD - good for an AMD or Intel laptop. Or firewall - it's version of PF is supposedly 4x better performing than older PF ports in other BSD's. It's net stack is effectively lockless when used with Mellanox NICs.
NetBSD - for embedded. it has it's own smp firewall npf, v9 brings along ZFS.
DragonFly - working towards lockless SMP, cluster file system.