Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Using Udev Without Systemd Is Going To Become Harder

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

  • #11
    Don't know all the specificities on these projects (i.e. udev and systemd) but, although I agree that in general it's good to be modular, it's also a good idea to focus on improvements from time to time.
    Honestly, we're talking about pretty low level architectures, do we really need to be *that* modular?

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by Alliancemd View Post
      I actually understand Lennart's frustration. This only will improve the experience, you don't see why someone would be against it - and here this guy comes with false claims that he doesn't hate on systemd while being opposed to something which does good, there is no other explanation to it just that the intention is to harm the project - and here comes the frustration...
      Since when does "I don't agree with this change to a VERY WIDESPREAD piece of software that ALMOST EVERYBODY (including those not using systemd) uses, that makes it so that non-systemd users can't use it. Please at least give us a way to work around it." Mean systemd hater? It's very logical to ask for Lennart to at least think about people besides himself.

      But judging from Lennart's response, I'm going to assume that's impossible.

      (Note, I use and like systemd, but Lennart is one of the biggest douches I've ever seen. Please, those who praise Lennart for anything except his good ideas and code (not that they're all good, mind you), get your head out of his ass.)

      Comment


      • #13
        Very True

        Originally posted by Anarchy View Post
        Actually, no. Lennart is pretty awesome. He always takes the most difficult projects and he has the most interesting ideas. His biggest problem is that he's often less considerate of others and moves the projects too fast, which results in too many bugs and inefficiencies. Sadly, this affects the adoption phase and puts him in negative light.
        To add to this insight, sometimes it's not what you say but how you say it. Lennart has a way of things in ways in the larger Linux community that tend to place him in a negative light.

        Comment


        • #14
          Everyone should calm down

          Originally posted by Anarchy View Post
          Actually, no. Lennart is pretty awesome. He always takes the most difficult projects and he has the most interesting ideas. His biggest problem is that he's often less considerate of others and moves the projects too fast, which results in too many bugs and inefficiencies. Sadly, this affects the adoption phase and puts him in negative light.
          Exactly. I actually like Lennart, and we are in good terms. I'm not happy that this particular thread post was referenced in this Phoronix post in this way, because it doesn't give
          an accurate picture of what is really going on.
          I wouldn't mind systemd becoming the Gentoo default, as I see systemd becoming the norm in Linux userspace, but that hasn't happened yet, and migration will need time.
          So, with all the best in mind, for everyone, for everything, I was only expressing that I'd like udev from systemd tree be usable without *an running systemd instance*
          for longer time, so users don't get too dramatical change too fast.

          Comment


          • #15
            In A Word...Yes

            Originally posted by Creak View Post
            Don't know all the specificities on these projects (i.e. udev and systemd) but, although I agree that in general it's good to be modular, it's also a good idea to focus on improvements from time to time.
            Honestly, we're talking about pretty low level architectures, do we really need to be *that* modular?
            Computing system architectures at any level should be modular for many reasons, but they mostly revolve around maintenance. Ever wonder why many Linux patches on Git are small? Perhaps that problem was a real small problem? Valid point. Perhaps it is easier to resolve the problem by breaking ti down into small pieces so the impact of each little piece can be evaluated? Yes, and it helps with bisecting patches if/when they cause issues further down the line.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by Daktyl198 View Post
              Since when does "I don't agree with this change to a VERY WIDESPREAD piece of software that ALMOST EVERYBODY (including those not using systemd) uses, that makes it so that non-systemd users can't use it. Please at least give us a way to work around it." Mean systemd hater? It's very logical to ask for Lennart to at least think about people besides himself.
              Though I see your point, Lennart did give alternatives: either fork and maintain current versions (which is par for the course in open source development when something changes and you need to keep it working the old way), or develop a new kdbus userspace for initialization/policy/activation alternative and get it integrated. IMO, this is fairly reasonable.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by teresaejunior View Post
                I hate Lennart's attitude, he acts just as a annoying spoiled kid. You either love and praise him, or be ridiculed. I don't doubt he is an intelligent man, but he's got a cult following him already who will go ahead and mock everyone he does.

                You see that when he presents a patch, he already includes the words "systemd haters". This way he can avoid any opposition. It's like some political minorities nowadays that call everyone who doesn't like anything they do just "haters".

                And oh, we need to be politically correct, right? So please, don't oppose the man.
                Stole my comment, +1

                I remember that some people were crying wolf some 2-3 years ago when udev got merged into systemd and everyone was like "it's ok, you con still continue using your init system, nothing will change".
                I dont take away that Lennart is working on his projects 20 hours a day (or so it seems by his commit activity), but he is becoming magalomaniac.

                Linux has always been about choice in everything, LP is trying to change that aspect, for better and worse (yeah, only if we could have one desktop manager, one display manager, one init system...).
                I'm using stripped down version of systemd on most of my boxes (let's be honest, it's better init system than anything out there), but I have stripped bullshit that comes with it by default (networkd, logind,timed...).

                I have always hated the fact that udev was merged with systemd (there never really was any rational reason apart from systemd being dependant on it).

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by NotMine999 View Post
                  Computing system architectures at any level should be modular for many reasons, but they mostly revolve around maintenance. Ever wonder why many Linux patches on Git are small? Perhaps that problem was a real small problem? Valid point. Perhaps it is easier to resolve the problem by breaking ti down into small pieces so the impact of each little piece can be evaluated? Yes, and it helps with bisecting patches if/when they cause issues further down the line.
                  Modular makes maintenance harder, not easier. Many different ways to do things increases complexity, it doesn't suddenly work better.

                  Regarding your example: Take a big poster, break it down into lots of small pieces. Try and put that together. Now try to break another poster (same size), break it into 9 pieces. Which is easier to combine?

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by Daktyl198 View Post
                    Since when does "I don't agree with this change to a VERY WIDESPREAD piece of software that ALMOST EVERYBODY (including those not using systemd) uses, that makes it so that non-systemd users can't use it. Please at least give us a way to work around it." Mean systemd hater? It's very logical to ask for Lennart to at least think about people besides himself.

                    But judging from Lennart's response, I'm going to assume that's impossible.

                    (Note, I use and like systemd, but Lennart is one of the biggest douches I've ever seen. Please, those who praise Lennart for anything except his good ideas and code (not that they're all good, mind you), get your head out of his ass.)
                    Virtually every desktop distro uses udev and thus they use systemd (apart from gentoo who forked udev and only pull relevant patches from systemd/udev).
                    Even ubuntu has systemd, they just don't use it as init system.

                    I think we still should be grateful that Lennart isn't politician, because this would be Hitler all over again (yay, GODWINS LAW - check).

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by tpruzina View Post
                      Stole my comment, +1

                      I remember that some people were crying wolf some 2-3 years ago when udev got merged into systemd and everyone was like "it's ok, you con still continue using your init system, nothing will change".
                      I dont take away that Lennart is working on his projects 20 hours a day (or so it seems by his commit activity), but he is becoming magalomaniac.

                      Linux has always been about choice in everything, LP is trying to change that aspect, for better and worse (yeah, only if we could have one desktop manager, one display manager, one init system...).
                      I'm using stripped down version of systemd on most of my boxes (let's be honest, it's better init system than anything out there), but I have stripped bullshit that comes with it by default (networkd, logind,timed...).

                      I have always hated the fact that udev was merged with systemd (there never really was any rational reason apart from systemd being dependant on it).
                      What a lot of inaccurate information in one post. I don't agree with some of the systemd developers have replied ("removing is ok" and the "being quick is good"). However, some systemd developers have disagreed and it seems it has not been merged.

                      Regarding no rational reason for merging udev: There was, it now uses the same build infrastructure and allows udev to use various common functions.

                      Regarding Linux always being about choice: It has never been about choice. You have the ability to tinker (GPL). Choice in itself? I prefer something which works.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X