Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu Plans To Move To Systemd's Logind

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • phoronix
    started a topic Ubuntu Plans To Move To Systemd's Logind

    Ubuntu Plans To Move To Systemd's Logind

    Phoronix: Ubuntu Plans To Move To Systemd's Logind

    While Ubuntu developers still are set on continuing to use their own Upstart event-based init daemon rather than the widely-used systemd, the developers at Canonical are planning to begin using systemd's logind component...

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

  • Vim_User
    replied
    Originally posted by bwat47 View Post
    My completely speculative theory is that ubuntu is going to adopt systemd eventually, they just don't want to right now *because* they are busy working on all this other stuff, such as getting unity-next and mir ready for 14.04, adding switching over to systemd to that list would be pretty ridiculous (and IMO their goal of getting unity-next and mir solid by ubuntu 14.04 is already pretty unrealistic).

    So for now they are taking the most important bits of systemd and tacking it onto upstart, this is less work in the short-term and this will make the eventual transition over to real systemd easier. If they do transition to systemd it would be after 14.04.
    I don't think that it would make much sense to abandon Wayland for Mir over the issue of having control over the project and then switch a different part of their distro from a project they have control over to something that does not give them the control they want.

    Leave a comment:


  • bwat47
    replied
    Originally posted by Serge View Post
    Ok so Canonical has always gone ahead and added their own differentiators to the Ubuntu ecosystem - things like Upstart and Unity in Ubuntu itself, and things like Launchpad and Ubuntu One as revolving around and enhancing Ubuntu, but they've always done a little bit at a time. Now they're simultaneously developing multiple separate systems (at least until they start making progress on their convergence goals), developing their own display server, contributing resources to help new software like Steam come to Linux, continuing to maintain and evolve software that hasn't been widely adopted outside Ubuntu, talking about switching to a rolling release model, and now this? Does Canonical have an infinite credit line or something? I thought they still weren't profitable. First: do they really have the means by which they can support so many projects at once? And second, even if they have the money to undertake this much all at once, isn't so many changes all at the same time just a recipe for corporate and engineering confusion, and thus disaster?

    I mean, shouldn't they at some point just say, "Fsck controlling everything, let's go back to letting someone else do the work on some of these subsystems." Granted, they can't keep using ConsoleKit if it's unmaintained, and forking it or taking over maintenance themselves is not the solution to being stretched out like this, but rather than throw energy into new stuff while they're still working out core issues with the old stuff, that to me is just, I don't know, crazy. If they're cherry-picking systemd components, wouldn't it be smarter to dump Upstart for systemd completely, take a little bit of time making sure that they integrate systemd correctly and that it does what they want it to, and then redirect the resources previously lost on Upstart towards one of their other projects?
    My completely speculative theory is that ubuntu is going to adopt systemd eventually, they just don't want to right now *because* they are busy working on all this other stuff, such as getting unity-next and mir ready for 14.04, adding switching over to systemd to that list would be pretty ridiculous (and IMO their goal of getting unity-next and mir solid by ubuntu 14.04 is already pretty unrealistic).

    So for now they are taking the most important bits of systemd and tacking it onto upstart, this is less work in the short-term and this will make the eventual transition over to real systemd easier. If they do transition to systemd it would be after 14.04.

    Leave a comment:


  • funkSTAR
    replied
    Originally posted by Delgarde View Post
    Because they're doing nothing of the sort. This has nothing to do with the debate over upstart vs systemd as system init daemons - it's about using parts of systemd for user session management, replacing the old Consolekit.
    Yeah the init battle is kind a over. While Canonical sticks to upstart the majority moved to systemd init. The next battle is more crucial. CoreOS vs shit pulled from Canonicals ass. Im betting my money on CoreOS.

    Leave a comment:


  • snadrus
    replied
    Migration is hard. Good for these Devs!

    There are many dependencies on the low levels (some hidden until testing finds them). Canonical's "Upstart works fine." is over now that they can't pay maintenance on the deprecated litany of services that SystemD unified.

    But a move is difficult (laborious, bug-prone), so a progressive approach is safer: avoid maintenance nightmares while working from inside to nudge management into SystemD.

    Leave a comment:


  • Delgarde
    replied
    Originally posted by bwat47 View Post
    I don't understand why they are trying to bolt on a bunch of systemd pieces into upstart, instead of just switching to systemd, which is obviously superior.
    Because they're doing nothing of the sort. This has nothing to do with the debate over upstart vs systemd as system init daemons - it's about using parts of systemd for user session management, replacing the old Consolekit.

    Leave a comment:


  • Delgarde
    replied
    Originally posted by funkSTAR View Post
    It is called CoreOS (sans Gnome stuff). And it is great, because it minimizes the maintaince burden.
    Agreed. I know some people don't like to have anything be mandatory, but as a developer, having to support multiple backends for this kind of stuff is a pain. Inevitably only one of them actually gets regular testing (the one the developers are using), the ones that do work are limited to lowest common denominator, and even then, you're spending half your time working around bugs in something you really don't give a crap about.

    I'm not against modularity and replaceable components in general, but sometimes it's just a really bad idea.

    Leave a comment:


  • DrYak
    replied
    Originally posted by j2723 View Post
    In a month we will be reading an article on Phoronix with the title: Ubuntu Plans To Move to Systemd
    And after one year: Ubuntu Drops Mir, Plans To Move To Wayland

    ...but then they'll alienate everyone by announcing that they will be developping their own kernel (based on a microkernel architecture, supporting Linux APIs, POSIX APIs and Windows NT APIs, all to be finished within 12 months, here's some work-in-progress that doesn't even boot).

    Leave a comment:


  • Luke_Wolf
    replied
    Originally posted by funkSTAR View Post
    Come on. You cant make such an assessment without looking at advantages/disadvantages. And the primary DISADVANTAGE these days are fragmentation like Canonicals complete fuck up. Demanding the developers provide the many extra hours of release management and testing to make separate versions of every modules is waste of time. And Canonical takes advantage of this situation and ships CLAed replacements all the time. THAT is helping fragmentation. If Canonical wants to fragment THEY should have the burden not everyone else.
    While I agree that their fragmentation should be their problem, just because things are designed as modules doesn't mean that having people using them in their systems inherently places more maintenance demands upon the people writing the modules, and in fact being modularized helps the initial developer because it makes it easier to maintain through testing capability that it opens up and otherwise. Also just because a person is using it doesn't mean that the module developers have to cater to that person, they can like Martin (the Kwin Developer) say "We're not going to take your patches that support only you", thus forcing the individual to take care of their own fragments with rebasing them and such.

    Leave a comment:


  • funkSTAR
    replied
    Originally posted by bwat47 View Post
    I don't understand why they are trying to bolt on a bunch of systemd pieces into upstart, instead of just switching to systemd, which is obviously superior.
    Control&CLA

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X