System D: Debian Fork

[Sam M.]

I came across this article below, and it looks like the System D
implementation on Debian has caused a great deal of havoc and alienation
amongst devs and admins, so a fork is potentially in the works. I was
wondering if a similar interest is also present in the openSUSE community?
Is openSUSE going to become one huge monolith where practically every
package is dependent on each other, and, the user is forced into a corner?
For instance, that atrocious Baloo virus that runs by default on a new KDE
install will start indexing before you allowed it to, and can't be removed
because it's dependent on so many things. Part of it can be removed (last I
checked), but not the entire thing. If things are going to become one big
monolith, which obviously is contrary to the Unix philosophy, why not just
run Windows?

It seems like more people than not don't like System D, and Lennart
Poettering's attitude has been described as rude, egocentric and childish
which doesn't help the case. PulseAudio was also developed by Pottering,
and I don't like it at all as it's just one more broken piece of software
on top of the already overly complex Linux sound stack. I've had problems
with it, and it has provided me zero benefit. Anyway, I think the System D
debate here should continue as not everybody here is swallowing the System
D Kool-Aide.

http://debianfork.org/

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/10/21/unix_greybeards_threaten_debian_fork_over_systemd_plan/

[Florian Gleixner]

Debian forks multiple times a year, while opensuse forks are very rare.
Look here:

http://futurist.se/gldt/wp-content/uploads/12.10/gldt1210.svg
--
Florian Gleixner
SV des Bibliotheksverbund Bayern, Verbundzentrale
im Leibniz-Rechenzentrum
Boltzmannstr. 1
85748 Garching

Tel.: [phone]
Fax.: [phone]
e-mail: ***@bib-bvb.de
e-mail: ***@lrz.de

[Sam M.]

By the way, Debian devs look to be signing off on some constitutional
document on their email list to avoid a fork, so a fork looks to be a
measure of last resort.

Post by Florian Gleixner

Post by Florian Gleixner
Debian forks multiple times a year, while opensuse forks are very rare.

http://futurist.se/gldt/wp-content/uploads/12.10/gldt1210.svg
I see your point, but System D is such a mammoth change to how things
are done that it may be one of those cancers that warrants a fork.
Rare would mean only drastic measures cause a fork, and I'm sure many
would agree that they hate System D yet love openSUSE. And they may be
willing to take drastic measures to do what they think is the right
way to do things. The more I read and learn about about System D, the
more I learn how it's its own little monolithic operating system.

Post by Florian Gleixner
Debian forks multiple times a year, while opensuse forks are very rare.
http://futurist.se/gldt/wp-content/uploads/12.10/gldt1210.svg
--
Florian Gleixner
SV des Bibliotheksverbund Bayern, Verbundzentrale
im Leibniz-Rechenzentrum
Boltzmannstr. 1
85748 Garching
Tel.: [phone]
Fax.: [phone]

[ianseeks]

Post by Sam M.
I came across this article below, and it looks like the System D
implementation on Debian has caused a great deal of havoc and alienation
amongst devs and admins, so a fork is potentially in the works. I was
wondering if a similar interest is also present in the openSUSE community?
Is openSUSE going to become one huge monolith where practically every
package is dependent on each other, and, the user is forced into a corner?
For instance, that atrocious Baloo virus that runs by default on a new KDE
install will start indexing before you allowed it to, and can't be removed
because it's dependent on so many things. Part of it can be removed (last I
checked), but not the entire thing. If things are going to become one big
monolith, which obviously is contrary to the Unix philosophy, why not just
run Windows?
It seems like more people than not don't like System D, and Lennart
Poettering's attitude has been described as rude, egocentric and childish
which doesn't help the case. PulseAudio was also developed by Pottering,
and I don't like it at all as it's just one more broken piece of software
on top of the already overly complex Linux sound stack. I've had problems
with it, and it has provided me zero benefit. Anyway, I think the System D
debate here should continue as not everybody here is swallowing the System
D Kool-Aide.
http://debianfork.org/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/10/21/unix_greybeards_threaten_debian_fork
_over_systemd_plan/

Vote with your keyboard and go to a distro that doesn;t use anything you don't
like.

[Anton Aylward]

Post by Sam M.
It seems like more people than not don't like System D,

I can see why you might think that.
it is often the case that a subject which a few find objectionable gets
more publicity because that mnority are more vocal.

I think that for everyone who is vocal about not liking systemd there
are 500 to 20,000 who accept it.

Its not about linking it or not liking it. Its no more about liking it
than liking five ligs/bolts on each wheel of your car -- except for the
vocal majority who drive Fords because its more efficient and easier to
change wheels when you have on 4 to undo and redo.

As if anyone notices or cares.
Yes its a ridiculous example. That's my point. The peoeple who drive
the cars don't notice and don't care.
But then for most people the underlying OS and how it boots, whether its
LILO or GRUB or GRUB2, whether its W/XP, W/7 or W/8 all doesn't matter
either. The see the application. Its only the 'geeks' like us that care.


I had my 12"[1] Samsung tablet at a conference and someone was admiring
it. He asked if that was Outlook. Yes he'd heard of Android, tablets
and all, but he used a laptop with a slightly larger screen and all mail
programs must be Outlook, all web browsers must be IE. The irony is
that he was an experienced head-hunter -- had been placing IT people for
over 25 years. He claimed to know enough about the technology
candidates used so they couldn't white-wash him. But all these were
just words to him, it seems.


A vocal group object to systemd. You can find a vocal group that object
to just about anything, regardless of evidence. That's their right.


But when that group threaten to or actually take violent action, that's
another matter.

if you are willing to put the effort into a fork then fine. But please
do not tell the rest of us that we have to go with you. Don't expect or
force the majority to support your efforts with their time or money.
The "more than not" argument does not hold. That the people who are
happy with systemd don't scream about it the way the detractors do, that
they don't go around spreading lies and misinformation, that they don't
threaten the detractors with physical violence, does not mean they don't
exist.

[Anton Aylward]

OBTW: Since I subscribe to this list there is no point in cc'ing me.

When did this vote occur?

Development under Linux has never been about a democracy but about those
who take an initiative and develop something. Either it gets used and
accepted by the community or not.

The only 'fascist' element that I've seen is that on occasions Linus is
outspoken.

There's a saying about "vote with your feet". If there's a vote going
on its to accept systemd simply because the vast numbers of users are
not , repeat NOT deserting systemd based implementations.

This has been foisted on the OpenSUSE community without ANY prior
discussion.

Ah. BIG LIE time again.

Many who you say "agree" with you simply have no opinion because
they donb't know ANY of the issues conerning systemd.

I think you mean "they don't care".
For them its a "difference that makes no difference".
Well, perhaps it makes debugging easier, state machines are ridiculously
easy to debug, as any hardware engineer will tell you. They are much
more deterministic.

That they don't know the issues may well be the case because they don't
care, all they care is that their system works. Maybe it works faster
now, but that's a side effect and not a design criteria.

Typical leftist -- always trying to inflate the numbersof people who
agree with you by counting people who do not,
and otherwise trying to inflate the appearance of
populareity for your pet causes.

Are you calling me a leftist?
Strange. Most people, who deal with me, my managers and peers, call me a
conservative. I fail to see what politics has to do with coding system
administration. And even if you want to discuss that, this forum is not
the place for it.

Still, people project what they want to believe.
You probably believe that 'leftists' is an insult.
As such it says more about you than it does about me.

Try this for once: HONESTY
You'll be amzing at how many enemies it do NOT make.

ROTHFLMAO!

You confuse a few concepts here. You believe that you are honest when
you are making personally intimidating, insulting and tactless remarks?
Even if that were so, its certainly no way to to lead people to accept
what you say and come to agree with your views.

It seems you can't discuss the technical merits of a piece of code
without resorting to personal insults.

[Sam M.]

I suppose the majority of people who commented on this article about
their distaste for System D are just flat out wrong and severely
mislead:

http://linux.slashdot.org/story/14/10/20/1944226/debians-systemd-adoption-inspires-threat-of-fork

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Anton Aylward

Post by Anton Aylward
OBTW: Since I subscribe to this list there is no point in cc'ing me.

When did this vote occur?

Development under Linux has never been about a democracy but about those
who take an initiative and develop something. Either it gets used and
accepted by the community or not.
The only 'fascist' element that I've seen is that on occasions Linus is
outspoken.
There's a saying about "vote with your feet". If there's a vote going
on its to accept systemd simply because the vast numbers of users are
not , repeat NOT deserting systemd based implementations.

This has been foisted on the OpenSUSE community without ANY prior
discussion.

Ah. BIG LIE time again.

Many who you say "agree" with you simply have no opinion because
they donb't know ANY of the issues conerning systemd.

I think you mean "they don't care".
For them its a "difference that makes no difference".
Well, perhaps it makes debugging easier, state machines are ridiculously
easy to debug, as any hardware engineer will tell you. They are much
more deterministic.
That they don't know the issues may well be the case because they don't
care, all they care is that their system works. Maybe it works faster
now, but that's a side effect and not a design criteria.

Typical leftist -- always trying to inflate the numbersof people who
agree with you by counting people who do not,
and otherwise trying to inflate the appearance of
populareity for your pet causes.

Are you calling me a leftist?
Strange. Most people, who deal with me, my managers and peers, call me a
conservative. I fail to see what politics has to do with coding system
administration. And even if you want to discuss that, this forum is not
the place for it.
Still, people project what they want to believe.
You probably believe that 'leftists' is an insult.
As such it says more about you than it does about me.

Try this for once: HONESTY
You'll be amzing at how many enemies it do NOT make.

ROTHFLMAO!
You confuse a few concepts here. You believe that you are honest when
you are making personally intimidating, insulting and tactless remarks?
Even if that were so, its certainly no way to to lead people to accept
what you say and come to agree with your views.
It seems you can't discuss the technical merits of a piece of code
without resorting to personal insults.
--
/"\
\ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML Mail
/ \
--

[Anton Aylward]

Post by Sam M.
I suppose the majority of people who commented on this article about
their distaste for System D are just flat out wrong and severely
http://linux.slashdot.org/story/14/10/20/1944226/debians-systemd-adoption-inspires-threat-of-fork

Just because you think that I'm wrong and misled for not agreeing with
you, you seem to think that the converse applies. I object to your
vitriol and your, personal insults.

In that, you are incorrect. You are entitled to your opinion on this
matter and are welcome to use a distribution that doesn't use systemd,
that doesn't use kde4, that doesn't use ipv6. You are entitled to take
the source and, together with like minded individuals, devote the effort
into coding and recoding a system to your preferences. That has always
been the Linux way; there are many such instances and examples. Android
has continued that tradition of FOSS letting others recode the way they
want: one such group recently got a large investment.

However, as someone once said, the right to go to hell in a hand-basket
of your own choosing does not mandate that I have to carry said basket.
(Go google for the source) I like the way openSuse is going. If it
starts going in a direction that I disfavour enough (all implementations
seem to have minor annoyances) then I'll go find another or go associate
with a group developing another. I've made that change a couple of
times in the past and it has brought me to Suse and I'm happy here.
Personally I feel RedHat is too radical for me :-)

Your right to dislike systemd does not give you, or aaron/dirk/banga,
the right to speculate about my sexual preferences, politics or ancestry
in an insulting manner. You can make your case without telling me that
I'm foolish to disagree with you.

This isn't a matter of religion, life or death, party politics or even
money. Its just about some free, open source code.

[Sam M.]

I am not Aaron or Dirk or Banga Gong. I'm not the only person on this
list that is questioning System D. I understand that you are offended
by his insults and I share your sentiments, but I'm not him.

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Anton Aylward

Post by Anton Aylward

Post by Sam M.
I suppose the majority of people who commented on this article about
their distaste for System D are just flat out wrong and severely
http://linux.slashdot.org/story/14/10/20/1944226/debians-systemd-adoption-inspires-threat-of-fork

Just because you think that I'm wrong and misled for not agreeing with
you, you seem to think that the converse applies. I object to your
vitriol and your, personal insults.
In that, you are incorrect. You are entitled to your opinion on this
matter and are welcome to use a distribution that doesn't use systemd,
that doesn't use kde4, that doesn't use ipv6. You are entitled to take
the source and, together with like minded individuals, devote the effort
into coding and recoding a system to your preferences. That has always
been the Linux way; there are many such instances and examples. Android
has continued that tradition of FOSS letting others recode the way they
want: one such group recently got a large investment.
However, as someone once said, the right to go to hell in a hand-basket
of your own choosing does not mandate that I have to carry said basket.
(Go google for the source) I like the way openSuse is going. If it
starts going in a direction that I disfavour enough (all implementations
seem to have minor annoyances) then I'll go find another or go associate
with a group developing another. I've made that change a couple of
times in the past and it has brought me to Suse and I'm happy here.
Personally I feel RedHat is too radical for me :-)
Your right to dislike systemd does not give you, or aaron/dirk/banga,
the right to speculate about my sexual preferences, politics or ancestry
in an insulting manner. You can make your case without telling me that
I'm foolish to disagree with you.
This isn't a matter of religion, life or death, party politics or even
money. Its just about some free, open source code.
--
A: Yes.

Post by Sam M.
Q: Are you sure?

A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.

Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?

--

[Anton Aylward]

Post by Sam M.
I am not Aaron or Dirk or Banga Gong. I'm not the only person on this
list that is questioning System D. I understand that you are offended
by his insults and I share your sentiments, but I'm not him.

Indeed.
You top post. He doesn't.

But you, like him and the others you mention, don't seem to have a
reasoned argument as to why not systemd. It seems to be all emotion and
hatred of individuals, if not me, then of Poettering for taking the
initiative to replace a flawed procedural based application with a much
more flexible and extendible declarative based one, and in doing so
applied many of the good programming practices we associate with leading
edge software development such as "Don't repeat yourself" (DRY), code
reuse (by factoring other functions to use common libraries and
utilities), aggressive refactoring.

So much of the way sysvinit works is WET - "We Enjoy Typing", sometimes
referred to as 'stamp coding".

Having begun life in hardware I like the idea of deterministic state
machines and clear dependency paths. I've always hated debugging
sysvinit scripts for the same reason I hate so many C programs and java
programs. Too much is hidden in the individual idiosyncrasies of the
programmer. Its not as if all the sysvinit scripts had the same author.
Very different from the days of V6 and V7 :-) Dennis may have been
idiosyncratic too, but he was just one guy.

If the answer is that you are a code guy and don't grok state machines,
then fine, I can appreciate that. Just don't take it out on me. I
massively prefer administering & configuring a systemd based machine
over a sysvinit machine.

[Ken Schneider - openSUSE]

Post by Sam M.
I came across this article below, and it looks like the System D
implementation on Debian has caused a great deal of havoc and alienation
amongst devs and admins, so a fork is potentially in the works. I was
wondering if a similar interest is also present in the openSUSE community?
Is openSUSE going to become one huge monolith where practically every
package is dependent on each other, and, the user is forced into a corner?
For instance, that atrocious Baloo virus that runs by default on a new KDE
install will start indexing before you allowed it to, and can't be removed
because it's dependent on so many things. Part of it can be removed (last I
checked), but not the entire thing. If things are going to become one big
monolith, which obviously is contrary to the Unix philosophy, why not just
run Windows?
It seems like more people than not don't like System D, and Lennart
Poettering's attitude has been described as rude, egocentric and childish
which doesn't help the case. PulseAudio was also developed by Pottering,
and I don't like it at all as it's just one more broken piece of software
on top of the already overly complex Linux sound stack. I've had problems
with it, and it has provided me zero benefit. Anyway, I think the System D
debate here should continue

Not a problem. There is a "Soapbox" forum for these types of discussions
available, take it there.

[Ken Schneider - openSUSE]

Post by Ken Schneider - openSUSE

Post by Sam M.
I came across this article below, and it looks like the System D
implementation on Debian has caused a great deal of havoc and alienation
amongst devs and admins, so a fork is potentially in the works. I was
wondering if a similar interest is also present in the openSUSE community?
Is openSUSE going to become one huge monolith where practically every
package is dependent on each other, and, the user is forced into a corner?
For instance, that atrocious Baloo virus that runs by default on a new KDE
install will start indexing before you allowed it to, and can't be removed
because it's dependent on so many things. Part of it can be removed (last I
checked), but not the entire thing. If things are going to become one big
monolith, which obviously is contrary to the Unix philosophy, why not just
run Windows?
It seems like more people than not don't like System D, and Lennart
Poettering's attitude has been described as rude, egocentric and childish
which doesn't help the case. PulseAudio was also developed by Pottering,
and I don't like it at all as it's just one more broken piece of software
on top of the already overly complex Linux sound stack. I've had problems
with it, and it has provided me zero benefit. Anyway, I think the System D
debate here should continue

Not a problem. There is a "Soapbox" forum for these types of
discussions available, take it there.

Wrong .
Ontopic discussionS are offtopic on the offtopic list.
This is on topic.
At first, you marginalized objectors by saying that we should have the
discussion later...

No, I said no such thing. Re-read the thread.

now you're complaining that objections weren't talked about sooner.
and saying that because we didn't discuss it sooner, we should shut the
fuck up.

Again, I said no such thing. I asked that this soapbox discussion be
taken to an appropriate forum:
http://forums.opensuse.org/forumdisplay.php/687-Soapbox

How about, instead, you stop being a censorious bastard?

Again, I am not censoring anything. And people have been asked by the
list admin not to use derogatory language or name calling on this list.

If you have a specific problem please let us know which version of
openSUSE you are using and what the problem is so that we can try and
help you get your system running.

[Sam M.]

The amount of information and posts from people that are vehemently
opposing System D isn't just a scenario where anti-System D people are
being vocal about it and the people content with System D aren't. It
looked like that to me at first, but the more I researched it and the
more it came up, the more it's obvious that System D brings with it
some major issues which should be discussed on this mailing list. I've
never before seen as large of an opposition and amount of anger in
relation to a software component of any OS until the System D debate
started, and it's on every mailing list and every news site just
about. Now, with SUSE, System D is mandatory so everyone's stuck with,
not to mention GNOME is dependent on it.

And to Ken Schneider, telling me to take this issue to the Soapbox
forum is actually rude and immature. You are not here to police the
list, even though maybe you get a little rise out of telling people
what they should do. If you don't like the topic, then don't post or
read it; it's very simple. This is a technical issue which has been
discussed on this list before, and the discussion needs to continue as
it's certainly not over. Below are some comments from the article I
linked to above, and obviously they are not people voicing their
dislike for System D just because they're opposed to change or because
they felt like trolling. And this is just one recent article; I can't
count how many Linux admins and developers are talking about how they
don't like System D:

"Just say it proper, sytemd is shit because it has too many problems,
because it does way too much.

I would not have a problem with it (I like the idea of systemd) if it
wasn't trying to reimplement, cron, anacron, iptables, rsyslog,
xinetd, and more.

Seriously somebody has to stop the madness."


"systemd is a windows-esque, monolithic, black box solution. ie. the
opposite of Unix design. It is also p*sspoor by all accounts."


"Ah, you've fallen into the same trap as Debian did. You've mistaken
systemd for a sysvinit replacement. It's not. It's a replacement for
just about the entire operating system stack (the clue is in the
name). Where currently the argument is about "GNU/Linux", it may soon
be better phrased "systemd/Linux".


"The fear is that once you adopt systemd, it will be unreasonably
difficult to replace it with anything better in the future, thanks to
its all-encompassing nature, and the encouragement of *explicit*
dependencies by user-facing software. There's no reason why the Gnome
DE should strictly require one particular init system, but it does."


"There's also the little detail that the permission tree in systemd
("the user doesn't own the process, each process owns its children")
is making a fragging permission mess very quickly which means that
after a while you have to run a whole lot of shit as root, à la
Windows pre-RT, or reboot to clean the mess up.

Systemd is a toy, not a proper tool. I say burn it. Burn it with fire."


"the "fun" part about systemd is how much it wants to do. Explain to
me why an init system needs (yes, it's required) an http server
running?

Systemd is basically trying to take over the entire software stack.
The attitude of the devs speaks volumes about this too. You find a lot
of gems in the kernel mailing lists. The Gentoo Linux forum as been
rather alive about this topic, as the maintainers of the distribution
refuse to make systemd the default (it's an option, but not default)
and a lot of the users agree with the choice.

Systemd is a lot like the windows registry. Lots of binary blobs you
can't read or fix if things go wrong. Most linux users would rather
the system took 10 more seconds to boot and be sure they can fix it if
something goes wrong. It's not like we reboot our machines all the
time."


"Back on topic, I loathe systemd. Alas, it's in RHEL 7 so I now have
to deal with it in Enterprise environments. That said, it has spread
its tentacles far wider since the version in RHEL 7, which essentially
just functions as a poor init replacement. I suppose I should be
thankful for small blessings."


"Funny; I've been administering Linux servers for over a decade and
never had issues reading, writing, using, or understanding SysV init
scripts. The complexity of SysV init scripts is very much overstated
by the systemd advocates, who of course benefit from that perception."


"Sorry, but I am not prepared to. Having dealt with sysvinit, systemd,
and upstart in both development and production environments I must say
I am not at all impressed by the last two. In my experience, upstart
is too flaky and systemd is just too complex and opaque.

Reading or writing sysvinit scripts is not difficult at all if you are
literate. I myself banged up a fair number of upstart->sysvinit
replacements for custom daemons without any significant effort (main
distros provide libraries of very useful shell functions out of the
box, and once you familiarize yourself with a few of those any
difficulties go away). In every single case the switch led to much
improvement in reliability and to much reduction in the frequency of
puzzled WTF expressions on the faces of developers and QA folks, which
was the main purpose of the exercise to start with."


"It might be that sysinit needs a replacement, but systemd is totally
not the answer."


"If Unix has not just survived but also outlived every other operating
system out there they might have got something right. And if there is
one thing that defines Unix, that would be the "do just one thing, and
do it very well" philosophy. Let's not fuck with that, shall we?"


"Well i thought it was April 1st when I heard Gimp was getting systemd
integration, this is just one big fucking piss take IMHO.

You have Mr Pottyring saying systemd is perfect and that any faults
are with downstream implementation. Well I spent several days
wondering why the fuck my Cups server had broken in Debian Sid, only
to find out that systemd requires both IPv4 and 6 to be active else
Cups will not work - I had disabled IPv6 due to previous issues. I
would expect Cups not to work if both stacks were non-functional.

Now I have a Samba server on my main desktop that hangs at shutdown
due to fact that systemd appears to be killing Samba before it
dismounts the networked shares properly - no sane fix so far from what
I see.

Yes I know Debian Sid is "unstable" but it was rock solid before this
systemd shit came along. My impression of Sid and Debian itself are
now one of turmoil and I can only hope that Debian reverses its
original decision and boots systemd into touch also, I hope they
seriously have a look at their leaders because they have allowed this
mess to happen.

If Debian stay with systemd then I will go elsewhere. I have already
started playing with FreeBSD and FreeNAS along with OpenBSD too as I'm
quite familiar with these systems anyway and their leaderships are not
prone to follow like sheep at a whim.

Personally I wouldn't want a Debian fork but if that's what it takes
then so be it but the Linux ecosystem is already too fragmented in my
opinion. If there was a fork then sure I'd look into it but whats
really needed is a weed out of the Debian leaders that have got us to
this point, they are setting the distro up for its potential
downfall."


"Yes I'm testing Slackware too at the minute but I believe they are
currently sitting on the fence regarding this. The thing is that if
systemd gets too invasive (which it already is) then core services and
apps may require more effort than what its worth to run as non-systemd
versions.

From what I know, the only non-systemd committed distros (at this

moment in time) are Slackware, Gentoo, Crux and Alpine Linux. I think
out of those I would go with Alpine Linux, a distro which is very much
underrated IMHO."


"I had a similiar problem with an NFS mount in /etc/fstab; systemd was
attempting a mount before network was up and was therefore failing.
There's an 11 month old Bugzilla ticket for this very problem.

The solution was to use a systemd.mount, and this worked. I've had
dhcpcd and udev misbehave as well, in the most basic of
configurations, and I can't troubleshoot it other than seeing in
journalctl that it isn't working.

It works okay for desktop, but you'll see odd things on servers that
have service quirks (the very thing systemd is supposed to make
easy...) like the Samba shutdown issue you have seen.

One could argue these are teething troubles, but Lennart just doesn't
seem to care. That, combined with the increasing sprawl of systemd
gives me great concern."


"I was seriously thinking of giving up on Linux due to systemd.

Not because it couldn't mostly be ignored but because it's really
really awful and just not what linux should have and because the
developers seem to want to impose it on everyone anyway.

Frankly if I want that I might as well use windows.

Hopefully this will go somewhere and kill the nonsense that is systemd
before it ends linux."


"Systemd won't fix poorly implemented services either. Anyone who is
not able to write/test/test-again something for init.d won't magically
have it all work perfectly under another scheme. Upstart seems to be
the least-worst option for something that permits dependency
resolution and parallel starting, but its not perfect either and
really should be extended to include managing the init.d scripts as
well, as realistically there is a lot of stuff that won't get
converted to native jobs any time soon.

At one point the Ubuntu project was doing a really good job of making
a Linux distro that worked, and was fairly sane, but sadly from about
10.04 seems to have lost its way. It really needs someone like that
who is interested in PC use, and not the tablets they fixated upon, to
drive a project sanely.

And never listen to the GUI developers either: look how many stupid
changes have been made to Gnome and Firefox, etc, etc."

"Pragmatic solution:

Use systemd just as an init replacement and polish it,
http://freshcode.club/projects/uselessd make everything else really
optional. (like all the crap with the binary logs)

Give the boot to Gnome until they get their act together again, and
tell the Gnome developers they can not dictate shit.

To understand Gnome's attitude go to this link, and read the comments
https://trac.transmissionbt.com/ticket/3685

The fun begins at comment n4 from the top"


"There are many possible approaches to the system init process. SysV
init is certainly not the best solution. It has many advantages,
including how simple it is (I have written many init scripts for my
own use), but it is quite messy, and pretty slow.

I have used upstart a bit. This seems just as messy, not as simple,
but the parallelisation does speed things up a fair whack. This is
very welcome on a desktop machine.

I haven't used systemd yet, so I won't comment.

However, when it comes to a server, I want tried and tested solutions
which are simple to administer. I don't care if it takes longer to
boot up, because it will rarely be shut down. My home Debian server,
running on desktop-class hardware, has been running continuously for
nearly a year, and was only shut down then for a hardware upgrade.
Business servers get shut down only when absolutely necessary. A
change from 1min to 30s to boot up makes no difference in most server
environments.

What Debian need to do is preserve the choice. Allow people to use
systemd if they want, but leave SysV init available too. I know this
is a more complicated way to do it, but systemd is not suitable for
everyone, especially a lot of their core users."


"Yes. This is something that the "progress for the sake of progress"
crowd just doesn't seem to get. In the domains where Unix has it's
most powerful stronghold, the one overriding consideration is
reliability. It doesn't have to be fast It doesn't have to be fancy.
It doesn't have to be usable by a trained monkey. It needs to be
reliable.

It's simply insane that it's a server vendor that's pushing this crap."

"We need something better than sysvinit

But systemd obviously isn't it as it seems to create problems."









"The number of other system components that are link-reliant on
systemd is growing. This in itself is the problem. More and more it is
becoming practically impossible to not have systemd in the ecosystem
somewhere.

http://gimpforums.com/thread-why-is-systemd-required-to-run-gimp"

"Another part of it is the fact that nobody else is contributing large
amounts of manpower to the desktop other than Redhat. When there was
SuSE and Sun as well it wasn't so bad.

He is almost single handedly responsible for me being back on Windows.
(The fact that Alsa can never get ice1712 correct for more than one
-rc of alsa-driver at a time is another part).

Freebsd or OSS4 is perfect for my card.

I have one old Thinkpad that still has Linux but most of it was built
from source (No Alsa / Pulseaudio / systemd / avahi - XiG X (r200) /
OSS4 / pkg-src).

I have a pretty powerful Netbsd VPS and I just use that."

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Ken Schneider - openSUSE

Post by Ken Schneider - openSUSE

Post by Sam M.
I came across this article below, and it looks like the System D
implementation on Debian has caused a great deal of havoc and alienation
amongst devs and admins, so a fork is potentially in the works. I was
wondering if a similar interest is also present in the openSUSE community?
Is openSUSE going to become one huge monolith where practically every
package is dependent on each other, and, the user is forced into a corner?
For instance, that atrocious Baloo virus that runs by default on a new KDE
install will start indexing before you allowed it to, and can't be removed
because it's dependent on so many things. Part of it can be removed (last I
checked), but not the entire thing. If things are going to become one big
monolith, which obviously is contrary to the Unix philosophy, why not just
run Windows?
It seems like more people than not don't like System D, and Lennart
Poettering's attitude has been described as rude, egocentric and childish
which doesn't help the case. PulseAudio was also developed by Pottering,
and I don't like it at all as it's just one more broken piece of software
on top of the already overly complex Linux sound stack. I've had problems
with it, and it has provided me zero benefit. Anyway, I think the System D
debate here should continue

Not a problem. There is a "Soapbox" forum for these types of
discussions available, take it there.

Wrong .
Ontopic discussionS are offtopic on the offtopic list.
This is on topic.
At first, you marginalized objectors by saying that we should have the
discussion later...

No, I said no such thing. Re-read the thread.

now you're complaining that objections weren't talked about sooner.
and saying that because we didn't discuss it sooner, we should shut the
fuck up.

Again, I said no such thing. I asked that this soapbox discussion be taken
http://forums.opensuse.org/forumdisplay.php/687-Soapbox

How about, instead, you stop being a censorious bastard?

Again, I am not censoring anything. And people have been asked by the list
admin not to use derogatory language or name calling on this list.
If you have a specific problem please let us know which version of openSUSE
you are using and what the problem is so that we can try and help you get
your system running.
--
Ken Schneider
SuSe since Version 5.2, June 1998
--

[jdd]

Post by Sam M.
some major issues which should be discussed on this mailing list. I've
never before seen as large of an opposition and amount of anger in
relation to a software component of any OS until the System D debate
started,

don't you remember kde3 versus kde4?

any *true* problem can be discussed here in a reasonable way, and will
be solved

"yet an other shit" is *not* a way to get usefull answers...

a general solution is maintaining a LTS version really long (at least 5
years)

I just notice a 5Tb external usb drive (mine is only 4Tb). World is
changing at a high pace and following it is not always easy, thanks
everybody who makes Linux a great choice!

thanks
jdd

[Patrick Shanahan]

* Sam M. <***@gmail.com> [10-22-14 17:34]:
[...]

Post by Sam M.
Seriously somebody has to stop the madness."

Ah, an agreeable point

# -------------------------------------------------------
:0:
* ^From.****@gmail.com|\
^From.****@gmail.com|\
^From.****@gmail.com|\
^From.****@gmail.com|\
^From.*akulkis|\
^From ***@gmail.com
/dev/null
# -------------------------------------------------------

[Anton Aylward]

Post by Patrick Shanahan

Post by Sam M.
Seriously somebody has to stop the madness."

Ah, an agreeable point

Perhaps "Banga Gong" is another of aaron's aliases?
maybe after his last bout of personal insults and threatening behaviour
Henne outed the "Dirk Gently" alias.

Heck 'bang a gong' is a bit obvious, isn't it.

Welcome back, aaron. I hope your stay is suitably short.

[Henne Vogelsang]

Hey,

One *last* time: This isn't a discussion list about Linux implementation
details, politics or people. This is the user to user support list where
people help each other with their problems with the openSUSE Distribution.

If you can't stay on topic, I moderate you.

This thread is dead now.

Henne