Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Gentoo 'lining up behind systemd'?
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Gentoo Chat
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
khayyam
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 2248

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ulenrich wrote:
It is ludicrous to speak about "vendor lock". What you really mean is "sponsor lock" or better: sponsor dependencies in the linux ecosystem.

ulenrich ... no, what we really mean is "vendor lock", or as NeddySeagoon suggested, "monopoly". An "ecosystem" is multifacited, its not the product of an "engineer" who vertically integrates every micro-organism for the purposes of the great plan. That is not an "ecosystem" but a monoculture. This is exactly what I was pointing to in post 7156158. The micro-organisms that have spent countless millenia converting sugars into alcohol are to be engineered out of the fermentation process because the vertical intergrators have decided that this method is not suitable for market penetration. A new centrally controlled 'fermentationd' is what the 'great engineer' had in mind before the minons of chaos started to set about the task all higgledy-piggledy. If you're one of these micro-engineers whos been cobbling together sugary bits for the past 20 or so years then you can either get with the program or find yourself another planet, as we're now controlling ... umm, sponsoring ... the sugar supply.

ulenrich wrote:
But there is another direction of the "Coup d'Etat" of systemd: User applications and environment. You have to give up on Gnome soon! But there is Canonical sponsoring a kind of a Gnome without systemd.

This statement completely lacks a propositon => conclusion.

ulenrich wrote:
But what else will be developed using the enhanced capabilities of systemd? Calm down: Although Kde could profit from systemd, I doubt Kde developers will give up there Qt rooted idea of world domination: run everywhere!

This statement completely lacks a propositon => conclusion.

ulenrich wrote:
The linux kernel without systemd will be possible, but user shells and applications ....

This statement completely lacks a propositon => conclusion.

best ... khay
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
M
Guru
Guru


Joined: 12 Dec 2006
Posts: 427

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

genstorm wrote:
There's a hard depend on consolekit by kdm, pambase and bluez. Sure you can disable upower, udisks in order to be able to remove polkit. Then you maybe want to have a modern qt messenger, kopete is unmaintained so out of question, so you emerge kde-telepathy-meta - which pulls in gstreamer. Leaving all this out makes KDE less and less a DE, even though I love kwin and plasma-desktop now that, finally, most long-standing bugs have been fixed.

uam - does it work with Device Manager?

You are right, I never used kdm/gdm, so I forgot about that. I use qingy in text mode, it can be configured to autologin. I always avoided gstreamer and only recently installed it as a kde-telepathy dependency, it is not that bad, I can live with it. What I can't stand is that I must install new init system to be able to use some DE?!

As for uam, no, it doesn't work with Device Manager, but it has support for hooks, so I have a couple of simple shell scripts that will add/remove icons on desktop.

KDE will also have to decide what to do, and how... Huh, so they made it so there are no choice! There was hal, all DEs implemented support (even BSD), then they deprecated it, then everyone switches from hal to *kits and now this, crazy!!

What I don't understand is how can anyone think this is good thing? 8O
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Doctor
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Jul 2010
Posts: 1515

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

M wrote:
You are right, I never used kdm/gdm, so I forgot about that.


Actually, kdm works without the *kits and it has for a while.

I have the full kdebase-meta installed (minus powerdevil) with no *kits. The only drawback is that system settings will not save my kdm settings, but that is what vim is for.
_________________
First things first, but not necessarily in that order.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Doctor
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Jul 2010
Posts: 1515

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

genstorm wrote:
There's a hard depend on consolekit by kdm, pambase and bluez.


There may have been at only point but not now, at least not on ~amd64.

I also don't get any errors (at least related to the *kits) for emerge -p kde-meta or kdepim-meta. I think upstream and/or the gentoo devs have been trying very hard to get rid of them.

At this point, I would say KDE can be *kit free with minimal loss of function.

EDIT: This seems to be in part because I am not using the kde profile, which still seems to force the consolekit flag.
_________________
First things first, but not necessarily in that order.


Last edited by The Doctor on Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:52 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmpogo
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 02 Sep 2004
Posts: 2289
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Doctor wrote:
genstorm wrote:
There's a hard depend on consolekit by kdm, pambase and bluez.


There may have been at only point but not now, at least not on ~amd64.

I also don't get any errors (at least related to the *kits) for emerge -p kde-meta or kdepim-meta. I think upstream and/or the gentoo devs have been trying very hard to get rid of them.

At this point, I would say KDE can be *kit free with minimal loss of function.


My only sticker is that k3b require kdelibs[+udisks], udisks require polkit unconditionally and polit requires consolekit :)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mv
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 4314

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

genstorm wrote:
There's a hard depend on consolekit by kdm, pambase and bluez.

With kde-4.8.5 (at least many parts, including kdm) one could avoid consolekit, and at a first glance, this seems not to have changed with kde-4.9.2. I have neither bluez nor pam, but bluez and pambase at least have a consolekit USE-flag, so I suppose this is also optional, only.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mv
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 4314

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dmpogo wrote:
My only sticker is that k3b require kdelibs[+udisks], udisks require polkit unconditionally and polit requires consolekit :)

This is why k3b (and BTW also kaudiocreator) had to go from my disk. However, xfburn works (although I would prefer k3b). I hope that after the regression to udisks2, maybe the developers of k3b and kaudiocreator will make the dependency optional.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krinn
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 4402

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It seems KDE team weren't crazy like Gnome guys. I might give KDE a try one day.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
genstorm
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 2477
Location: Austria

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@The Doctor, mv: In kde profile, consolekit + polkit flags are set in use.force because otherwise it is not supported.
_________________
backend.cpp:92:2: warning: #warning TODO - this error message is about as useful as a cooling unit in the arctic
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmpogo
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 02 Sep 2004
Posts: 2289
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 12:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mv wrote:
dmpogo wrote:
My only sticker is that k3b require kdelibs[+udisks], udisks require polkit unconditionally and polit requires consolekit :)

This is why k3b (and BTW also kaudiocreator) had to go from my disk. However, xfburn works (although I would prefer k3b). I hope that after the regression to udisks2, maybe the developers of k3b and kaudiocreator will make the dependency optional.



Yee, but xfburn pulls in a bunch of xfce dependencies ... Although I may admit its been a while since I burned anything, k3b was always for me one of three-four applications for which I do have a desktop in a first place :) Anyway, all of this is not a big deal.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
smartass
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 04 Jul 2011
Posts: 189
Location: right behind you ... (you did turn around, didn't you?)

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

dmpogo wrote:

... k3b was always for me one of three-four applications for which I do have a desktop in a first place...

Perhaps you could try cdrecord in the command-line:
Code:

mkisofs path/to/source/dir | cdrecord -v -

assuming you want a simple ISO-9660 fs and your only CD drive is esily auto-detectable

I can only hope this may give hope to someone struggling with graphical CD burners.

As a side note, I hope this demonstrates that there usually is a separate project adhering to UNIX philosophy that will enable you to achieve what you needed tons of bloat on a DE for. The only "inconvenience" (which eventually turns into a convenience) is that you may have to script up your own personal helpers and mix them with a properly configured sudo, which is essentially what DEs are doing anyways.
It's just another investment-gain question, how mush time do you want to invest into learning and scripting a few things for having your own custom, perfectly suited DE? Isn't this opportunity to patch up your own perfect system the main reason why most of us are using *NIX-like OSes in the first place?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Yamakuzure
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 21 Jun 2006
Posts: 1447
Location: Bardowick, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2012 8:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

smartass wrote:
It's just another investment-gain question, how mush time do you want to invest into learning and scripting a few things for having your own custom, perfectly suited DE? Isn't this opportunity to patch up your own perfect system the main reason why most of us are using *NIX-like OSes in the first place?
No. Some of us just want to do their work. I am paid for writing software and libraries that are supposed to run on *NIX-Machines (Debian Linux and AIX4/5 mainly) and therefore I need a Linux desktop as Windows can't get me anywhere. (And I can't really bear having to program with Visual Studio. I have to every other day and don't want it every day.)

So for people actually doing their work with Linux "scripting a few things" that basically do not need to be scripted is a waste of time. And can cost you your job.
_________________
systemd - The biggest fallacies
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
steveL
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 2949
Location: The Peanut Gallery

PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2012 11:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yamakuzure wrote:
So for people actually doing their work with Linux "scripting a few things" that basically do not need to be scripted is a waste of time.

I have no idea how that follows from your prior statements. Don't get me wrong: I love k3b and I much prefer a GUI for burning disks. But if you can't be bothered to knock up the odd script here or there to make things work how you want, it sounds like you don't really know *nix as well as you claim.

And honestly, where do you get off with that "people actually doing their work with Linux" like you're somehow above the rest of us? Just what exactly do you think we do with our machines?
Quote:
And can cost you your job.

Wow. So you work on "software and libraries" for *nix, but are not allowed to use scripts? My sympathies: your employers sound like assholes.

I would buy them a copy of "The Unix Programming Environment" (Kernighan & Pike, 1984) and ask them to read it over a weekend. It sounds like it would help your understanding too; I sincerely doubt that you've read it, or you wouldn't be coming out with such arrant nonsense.

It's available second-hand very cheaply nowadays, and for anyone who hasn't read it: trust me, it will blow your mind. I wish I'd read it when I was starting out.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khayyam
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 2248

PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2012 1:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yamakuzure wrote:
Some of us just want to do their work. I am paid for writing software and libraries that are supposed to run on *NIX-Machines (Debian Linux and AIX4/5 mainly) and therefore I need a Linux desktop as Windows can't get me anywhere. (And I can't really bear having to program with Visual Studio. I have to every other day and don't want it every day.)

Yamakuzure ... firstly, the latter doesn't follow from the former, there is no connection between the statement "[s]ome of us just want to do their work" and "therefore I need a Linux desktop [...] can't really bear having to program with Visual Studio", its one statement after another without an argument. Secondly, "some of us" have put in hours of our free time doing all manor of tasks in order for you to do what you do, do you think this group of people could provide the same opener, and if they did would this OS your currently using for your "work" even be in existance? The most common agrument I have recieved from GUI bound users (ie: MacOS X and Windows users) is "I just want to have [insert app/game] work" ... "I don't want to understand anything about how the OS works, I just want to use it" (actual quote), this is normally followed by a look of bemusement at something as (in my mind) staightforward as a command line. This group of people are generally advocates of the proposition of "new technologies" but infact are more bound by market forces, trends, than "enabled" by it. There is a entire industry built up arround them, with its mantras of "usablitiy", "global connectivity", etc, etc, and like the economy in which it was born, its little more than a bubble.

Now, as steveL has rightly said, what is it you think we do, and where does this madness of "use" abstracted from the skill aquired from "use" end? Becuase, the current trend in compuatation is such that the user is increasingly removed from the equation, "usability" is overdetermining "use" and the user is little more than a machanism for inserting coins in a slot.

Yamakuzure wrote:
So for people actually doing their work with Linux "scripting a few things" that basically do not need to be scripted is a waste of time. And can cost you your job.

That statement is just wrong on too many levels ...

best ... khay
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mv
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 4314

PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2012 3:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

smartass wrote:
assuming you want a simple ISO-9660 fs and your only CD drive is esily auto-detectable

Unfortunately, things are not so simple. It starts with all the trouble about long filenames (what is really "compatible" with a "random" system? Rock-ridge, iso-level-xxx, joliet)? Then I want to use dvd+rw (e.g. how to select optimal speed and buffer capability); why does k3b preformat it (and how?). Sometimes I want to extend a given disk, keeping some files, renaming or overriding others, ... actually I even do not know how to calculate how much data will fit on the disk (with or without overburn hacks).
Sure, one can learn all these things (and after one has broken 5-10 disks one can probably even learn how to do it correctly).
However, since a failed attempt actually does some damage (or perhaps is recognized only weeks later when you realize that the disk is not usable on some other system), I try to avoid experiments here which others have already done...

Don't get me wrong: I am not speaking against a shell approach in general. Just experimenting with hardware is not something which I want to do: In this case (of CDs/DVDs), I want sane and easily understandable/usable defaults.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
smartass
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 04 Jul 2011
Posts: 189
Location: right behind you ... (you did turn around, didn't you?)

PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2012 8:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mv wrote:

Unfortunately, things are not so simple.

What I meant with "if you want only..." was that without providing further command line options to the programs in the shell command I wrote cdrecord would not do anything advanced.
But I assure you that (most likely) everything you're asking for can be achieved with cdrecord if you
Code:
man cdrecord

The man page is long, helpful and full of advanced options.

@Yamakuzure

I believe that if you look at scripting up stuff as "an ability to modify the work environment to achieve greater efficiency" then that's something most bosses would appreciate. I've heard stories of people that got big raises or promoted just because they scripted up some stuff and made life easier for themselves and their colleagues. Actually, many SW (sub-)projects start like this and eventually can become products.
If you fear some scripting may require more time than you'd like to put in, you should try to convince your boss that the outcome of your scripts would benefit you (and possibly your colleagues) and boost your efficiency.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mv
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 4314

PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2012 9:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

smartass wrote:
The man page is long, helpful and full of advanced options.

...which you can only understand if you are an expert in cd/dvd handling and know which format can be read by which systems. I had already burned CDs with rock-ridge which then had produced broken filenames under windows etc. I would prefer if such things would just work[TM]. Moreover, reusing files from an earlier session (and e.g. renaming/replacing them without rewriting the existing data) probably requires to combine mkisofs and cdrecord in a tricky way.
Sure, it is certainly possible to do it if you have enough time and energy and cds to try (after all, k3b will probably just translate everything to corresponding calls to these tools), but to learn it you have to become an expert in something which Joe Average (and also me) does not have the time or intention to - one or two broken CDs due to failed experiments were enough for me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Yamakuzure
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 21 Jun 2006
Posts: 1447
Location: Bardowick, Germany

PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2012 10:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, if you _want_ to misunderstand someone, ok. My text was a reply. A reply to the statement, that it is a good idea to throw away working software just for the sake of "do it yourself" because we have chosen to use *nix just for that. And that is plain wrong.

And no, my bosses ain't assholes, but how do I justify wasting hours to get something to work the "scripted"-way when it can be done in an instant with existing software? (If this "software" does not work, it is a completely different story, of course.)

Of course I am allowed to write scripts. I write a couple of them (small one-job-helpers) every day. Everybody here does. In bash, ksh and/or perl.

Oh, and I spend one or two dozen of hours every week of my free time for debugging and writing patches for whatever does not work, uploading my work to various upstream and so on. So thank you very much.

So if you have questions, maybe because I did not make myself clear enough to not offend you, please ask. If I can not answer your questions, then you may jump down my throat, but not before.

Before you judge any statement as "arrant nonsense", it might be a good idea to look at the context. And if that is not clear, ask or ignore, please.
_________________
systemd - The biggest fallacies
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thistled
Guru
Guru


Joined: 06 Jan 2011
Posts: 478
Location: Scotland

PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2012 11:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just ignore them man. They have pi$$ed off quite a few people on here with their loud mouths. Some more than others.
_________________
Whatever you do, do it properly!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmpogo
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 02 Sep 2004
Posts: 2289
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 4:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

smartass wrote:
dmpogo wrote:

... k3b was always for me one of three-four applications for which I do have a desktop in a first place...

Perhaps you could try cdrecord in the command-line:
Code:

mkisofs path/to/source/dir | cdrecord -v -

assuming you want a simple ISO-9660 fs and your only CD drive is esily auto-detectable

I can only hope this may give hope to someone struggling with graphical CD burners.


Yeah, I did that 10 years ago, and still remember syntax. But one does not have to go that far, bashburn works well enough for simple tasks I ever needed
(and as I said it is probably couple of years since I burned the last dvd).

And k3b is not a struggle, it just pulls dependencies. Some time ago k3b decided it will detect the drives autmatically and only automatically, without giving
manual option to type in /mnt/cdrom. And since then it was first HAL which was manadatory to the bitter end, now udisks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sporkbox
n00b
n00b


Joined: 11 Sep 2012
Posts: 21
Location: United States

PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 5:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

krinn wrote:
yngwin wrote:
It is expected that this will become increasingly more difficult, and sooner or later we will be forced to use a udev fork or replacement instead.


We all know what is going to happen, from the very first time when they merge udev with systemd source and keep claiming nothing will change.

What "I" don't know is how gentoo will handle it when end of road is reach : been a gnomeOS sheep, bloat to death or walking its own way with the linux philosophy like now. Looks like many gentoo devs think systemd path isn't the right one, so i'm quiet happy.

I'm just wishing that gentoo pickup a path, erk, even the systemd one, but NOW (at least i will know i have to seek another distro then). Why wait the end of road if you know where the road is going ? Don't waste time at running a dead end. An udev fork already exist, and we have many init already (and of course the one we care, openrc).
If a distro start dropping udev, systemd, or even gnome, this will be a clear message sent.

Not only you will end with a stronger system, as you have took time not to hack systemd, but debugging, fixing and making grow the udev fork. But also maybe make them rethink about their way to work.
And if they don't, well, no more gnome on gentoo, but it's not gentoo's fault. And all others WM will be support with a higher stability, user-friendly tools and fun for users : KISS tools.
I'm pretty sure many distros (Lennart & friends are really good at upsetting everyone, upto linus and kernel guys) add support for that "udev fork" too, and so adding patch and feature, making it grow at a faster rate.


(Emphasis mine, to highlight what I'm replying to)

I don't see any waiting happening in Gentoo. It seems to me that some devs have chosen to add systemd to portage and maintain it. It's there as an option, and that's the best way to handle the problem IMO. I'm personally against systemd and what it means for GNU/Linux, but if someone out there running Gentoo wants it, why should he be denied it? The same goes for any other init system. User choice is one of the most important aspects of a good Linux distro, IMO. Destroy that and you deter a great number of users. In fact, it was the reason I left Arch and went to Gentoo; they did not provide a way to have a system that didn't have systemd installed, because 49+ packages directly depend on it (cups, dbus, GNOME, etc). Had they maintained user choice (regardless of default init), I'd have stayed. I'm not alone in that sentiment, either.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 32334
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 6:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The mark of good management is not just when decisions are made, they are made and carried through.
Its equally important that when no decision is required, none is made. Thats where we are with udev right now.
There is a choice - the choice works. More udev choice is becoming available too.

The right thing to do is to leave choice to users for as long a possible and only make a distro wide choice if we ever need to.
I really don't see that day approaching any time soon. Its not the Gentoo way. There may come a day when Gnome depends on systemd. Gentoo can accommodate that, emerge gnome will pull in systemd as a dependency. Everyone else can continue to avoid the init system of the day.

As you can see, Gentoo will continue to provide user choice.
_________________
Regards,

NeddySeagoon

Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Gentoo Chat All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum