CrunchBang Is The Latest Linux Distribution Calling It Quits

[MoonMoon]

Killed by systemd.

And counting...

https://corenominal.org/blog/no

[gilboa]

Well, village idiot? ahh probably you come from a village and you are proyecting. How can I read your lips on text? When Red Hat anounce the Fedora Workstation/Cloud/Server they also anounce the plan for CentOS if you don't readed cause you don't care probably where cleaning the dust of your 4 pc and talking with some fat dudes on internet, but you still can readed if you know how to use Google,

First, as a general comment, when one tries to throw insults at at another, one should use semi-proper spelling and grammar. Throwing badly phrased insults simply makes you look like a simpleton, nothing else. BTW, being a non-native English speaker is generally a bad excuses.

Second, as the link I sent was simply to complicated for you to fully comprehend, let me try to write a poem for you (all rights reserved, Gilboa, 2015):

"CentOS, has one noble goal,
To be compatible with RHEL as a whole.
RHEL sources CentOS takes,
Binary compatibility it fakes.
If systemd is used by RHEL,
CentOS will gladly use it and send SysV to hell.
All RHEL clones do the same,
Scientific Linux is just as tame.
Even Oracle Linux will not break the line,
As much Oracle hates RHEL for eating their pie."

- Gilboa

[cocklover]

Read my lips, SLOWLY, CentOS uses RHEL SRPMS (sources) and recompiles them while trying to maintain binary compatibility. This means, my dear troll, that if RedHat uses GNOME 3, systemd or any other technology your-trollhod dislikes, CentOS will use the *same* SRPM (source), recompile it and use it *as is*. [1]

Congrats for getting my vote in your nomination as next year's village idiot.

- Gilboa
[1] https://www.centos.org/about/

Well, village idiot? ahh probably you come from a village and you are proyecting. How can I read your lips on text? When Red Hat anounce the Fedora Workstation/Cloud/Server they also anounce the plan for CentOS if you don't readed cause you don't care probably where cleaning the dust of your 4 pc and talking with some fat dudes on internet, but you still can readed if you know how to use Google,

[dungeon]

But to be exact what i don't like about Antix is not that it still have xmms and gtk1 ... but because of communist propaganda in that distro, fire up browser and you will see it

If you like fluxbox ootb, better try vsido

http://vsido.org/

[dungeon]

Last time i checked it, it was based on testing never on stable. It might only looks like it is based on stable but that is only now, because Debian is in freeze .

Ah he maded one iso for systemd-free lovers based on wheezy, that is just exception rather then a rule .

Those from Mepis community reminds me on Ubuntu, with great number of unofficial/backported/etc... packages, only without a big company to support/fund them

[DeepDayze]

Only that #! is/was all about crunchified Debian stable.

For unstable users there are plenty of playground distros, but it can be also only one which "Holding the world record with over 100 different editions and 70 window managers!"

http://linuxbbq.org/

At least i like how they show what is nonsense of installers

AntiX is based on Stable as well, and there's also people who installed AntiX then upgraded to Testing or Sid and the shared info how to have a Testing/Sid based AntiX setup. The main WM's AntiX has are Fluxbox, IceWM and jwm, which are pretty darn light so that AntiX can run pretty well on the older machines as well as the newest.

[Sonadow]

The problem with SystemD is not the techonology itself but rather that it is Linux specific and lots of other software hook into it. Software no longer works on BSD, OSX and Linux like it used to. That was one of Linux' strengths, and what set it apart from the bastard child of operating systems; Windows.

SystemD is turning Linux into a Windows of sorts. Isolated, lonely and with lots of special stuff that doesn't work on other closely related operating systems. I don't hate SystemD for what it is, but I am a bit worried about the impact and consequences it will have on the POSIX eco-system.

OS X is Single-UNIX certified; do you see any OS X software working on Linux or other UNIXes like BSDs?

There's no such thing is portability anymore; deal with it. Developers love to make OS-specific API calls because it reduces their workload of having to implement something that the OS already provides, and typically allows for full leverage of what the stack is capable of.

[justmy2cents]

The problem with SystemD is not the techonology itself but rather that it is Linux specific and lots of other software hook into it. Software no longer works on BSD, OSX and Linux like it used to. That was one of Linux' strengths, and what set it apart from the bastard child of operating systems; Windows.

SystemD is turning Linux into a Windows of sorts. Isolated, lonely and with lots of special stuff that doesn't work on other closely related operating systems. I don't hate SystemD for what it is, but I am a bit worried about the impact and consequences it will have on the POSIX eco-system.

it is systemd, not SystemD

how would OS whose major strength is the fact that you don't really need it even define it self? the portability as you say was one of the major downsides for Linux, since most people targeted lowest common denominator between all systems. that also prevented active usage of some Linux specific technologies that reside in kernel forever now. things like cgroups, kernel namespaces... existed for long time, but they were never used simply because they were not portable. i for one am glad that Linux finally started defining and differentiating it self from others simply because now it can progress at its own pace instead of being dragged back by the slowest

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POSIX read what POSIX is. then try connecting it with systemd again... newsflash! it ends in failure since the 2 are not related at all. and another newsflash... Linux never was fully POSIX compliant, mostly yes, fully never. same as Linux never was Unix, it was Unix LIKE OS

[justmy2cents]

Congrats for getting my vote in your nomination as next year's village idiot.

- Gilboa
[1] https://www.centos.org/about/

+1 on nomination

[justmy2cents]

CentOS was never really an "alternative" anyway... it's major selling point was that it was 99.9% identical to RHEL, but completely free of cost. If it had diverged too much, they would have lost users...

that alone makes it alternative to RHEL. otherwise users wouldn't have option to get the same by opting for free or paid support. and ever since RH got involved with CentOS, only difference i see is updates reaching mainstream sooner