Ubuntu To Abandon Upstart, Switch To Systemd

[c117152]

So soon? I thought they'd at least wait a few more months before making it official. I guess they're more committed to their corporate clients than I thought.

Canonical may survive yet...

[89c51]

Hell=Frozen. It will enter eternal ice age once they adopt Wayland.

[aigarius]

First of all "loosing" does not mean there was a fight. There was a competion. Just like Olympics. Someone wins, someone looses.

I am glad this is over.

But really the hard part has just began. Especially for SystemD upstream. Thing is - while systemd a cool technical solution it has so far been lead in a quite restrictive way. Significant functionality has been rejected and other functions forced by fiat. That will not fly anymore. Distributions such as Debian and Ubuntu have requirements that their init systems must meet. If systemd developers balk at those requirements or reject patches implementing them, then they can rapidly find out that they are not systemd upstream anymore - if systemd development is blocked when it is *the* init system of Debian and Ubuntu, people will not wait, Debian/Ubuntu will fork systemd and run forward. Other distributions in such situation are likely to jump ship very rapidly as well, leaving the few remainign systemd original people doing something noone cares about anymore.

That is another risk of fame. I hope everyone involved realizes that possibility.

[FLHerne]

To the user, this literally means nothing. I think its funny how angry people are getting over this.

Depends what kind of user. Desktop users, sure. Anyone running servers (probably majority of Debian, significant proportion of Ubuntu users) will have to learn to manage things with systemd rather than SysV or Upstart.

I actually think (having used both the newer ones quite a bit) that systemd is far more intuitive than Upstart, and of course Debian admins would have had to learn one or the other anyway. So the only people who 'lose out' will be current Ubuntu or RHEL users who got used to Upstart already and now have to switch a second time.

[liam]

so upstart is not there anymore, with all the promises of an event based service/drivers/scripts loading that came with vanished cause of the stubborn debian guys that have the nih syndrome.(upstart is a project OLDER than systemd)

I'm against systemd for the simple reason that it's becoming too much intertwined with a lot of subsystems, the worst case beign gnome that can't be run without it(see all the problems the guys at sabayon had, they had to implement systemd on their own cause of it)

Uhm, systemd generates a dependency tree. It needs that to actually do its job.

[dh04000]

Depends what kind of user. Desktop users, sure. Anyone running servers (probably majority of Debian, significant proportion of Ubuntu users) will have to learn to manage things with systemd rather than SysV or Upstart.

Good points. To the Desktop user, nothing will change, we'll keep using facebook as usual . To the server user, things will change in a big way. I usually think of server users as "creators" more than users though That being said, I have set up several headless minecraft and music playback servers, and still haven't directly interacted with the init system yet. And thoughtful never will, lol.

[Ericg]

You should not put words "systemd" and "chosen" in the same sentence.

The distributions chose it because they thought it worked the best, just because the users of the distribution did not choose it does not mean it was not chosen. The distributions work for themselves and those who pay them, if certain people don't like it then they are free to voice their opinion and be heard but do not assume that your opinion is entitled to be acted upon. If you do not agree to it you can either move to a distro that does follow your opinion, or you can accept the change in reality and continue to use the distro you use, or you can go back to OS X / Windows and sulk there.

Distributions are not democracies including all users, do not pretend that they are.

[krach]

Mark Shuttleworth:

We?ll certainly complete work to make the new logind work without systemd as pid 1.

Wait, what?

I didn't get that either. They decide to adopt systemd, but are still ensuring that logind will work without systemd. Why?

[marciocr]

That's a change i didn't see coming. Big surprise in a positive way.
Next: Mir to Wayland?

No.
Mir and Wayland are different things.

Mir is a display server. Wayland is a display server protocol.

You can't abandon mir to use wayland. Wayland it not usable, only implementable.

What can happens in the future that a 2.0 version of mir can implement the wayland protocol. And according to some ubuntu devs, it not so hard to do this.

[Ericg]

so upstart is not there anymore, with all the promises of an event based service/drivers/scripts loading that came with vanished cause of the stubborn debian guys that have the nih syndrome.(upstart is a project OLDER than systemd)

I'm against systemd for the simple reason that it's becoming too much intertwined with a lot of subsystems, the worst case beign gnome that can't be run without it(see all the problems the guys at sabayon had, they had to implement systemd on their own cause of it)

Systemd is event based, so I'm not sure what you are talking about there.

One point of confusion that trips up a lot of people is the fact that there's 2 systemds. "systemd" refers to the binary in /usr/(s)bin. "Systemd" refers to the umbrella name for the project / source tree. Not everything in the source tree is apart of the systemd binary, in fact a lot of things are not. What gnome specifically depends upon is logind which is in the systemd source tree, but not apart of the systemd binary. They depend on that for user permissions of suspend/resume and hibernation and such. When you install the "systemd" package you get logind, but even though they are in the same package (distribution's choice) they are not in the same binary.

But that's actually not entirely true either because gnome doesn't depend on logind specifically, what they depend upon is logind's DBUS API. If someone else wanted to come around and write a new project that copied logind's DBUS API then Gnome could depend upon -that- project OR logind, it wouldn't care as long as the API was handled