| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
wswartzendruber
Veteran
Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 1196
Location: Jefferson, USA
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 7:36 pm Post subject: Merging: udev and systemd |
 |
|
| I read on LWN that they're merging. Too lazy to link. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nomilieu
n00b
Joined: 22 Nov 2011
Posts: 24
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16028
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 11:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Seems like the pertinent info is in the title. Much appreciated.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.
In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sts
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Posts: 97
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 1:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| So nothing is changing except they are now built and packaged together. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
miket
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 97
Location: Gainesville, FL, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 2:58 am Post subject: Did you read the news? "Udev and systemd to merge" |
|
|
The unholiness continues. I just now read in LWN that the gang is planning to merge the systemd sources with the udev sources. What were they smoking?
The date of the article is April 3. It sounds like the stuff of April 1.
So what's next for systemd to assimilate? D-Bus? Apache? Emacs?
They *say* that distros which do not use systemd will still be able to compile udev separately. There is this statement in the article, and I sure hope that Kay Sievers is misspeaking a bit here:
| Quote: | Distributions not wishing to adopt systemd can build udev pretty much
the same way as before, however should then use the systemd tarball
instead of the udev tarball and package only what is necessary of the
resulting build. |
Really? Get the systemd tarball in order to compile udev? Is this a Freudian slip? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
der bastler
Apprentice
Joined: 13 Apr 2003
Posts: 222
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 7:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Can anybody give me a briefing regarding "systemd" (and perhaps "journal")? What are advantages/disadvantages compared to baselayout2/OpenRC?
_________________
Tempus fugit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pigeon768
l33t
Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 667
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gusar
Advocate
Joined: 09 Apr 2005
Posts: 2553
Location: Slovenia
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 9:59 am Post subject: Re: Did you read the news? "Udev and systemd to merge& |
|
|
| miket wrote: | | Really? Get the systemd tarball in order to compile udev? Is this a Freudian slip? |
Err, what Freudian slip? What's wrong with that statement? The projects are merged at the source level. So there's one tarball - systemd. From that tarball, you either compile systemd+udev or just udev.
Just to spell it out as clearly as possible: Nothing changes with this for end users! You just download a bigger tarball when installing udev. Big deal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mrsteven
Veteran
Joined: 04 Jul 2003
Posts: 1878
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 10:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Even if nothing changes from a user perspective right now, this is the first step to systemd doom on (almost) every box. Seems like in a few years all systems will be poisoned with that systemd crap, which then will also have merged Emacs (every init system needs a built-in editor, you know  ), Wayland (for bootsplash), half of GNOME (no idea why, but merge it), NetworkManager, CUPS, syslogd, crond, atd and mysql (the latter for storing the system log in a nice, human-unreadable binary form). 
_________________
Unix philosophy: "Do one thing and do it well."
systemd: "Do everything and do it wrong." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
theBlackDragon
l33t
Joined: 23 Nov 2002
Posts: 756
Location: Gent (Belgium)
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 11:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
So the project that caused the mess (udev) is merging with the project taking the wrong approach to solving the mess (systemd)? I don't see how this could go wrong.
_________________
Fvwm|Fvwm forum|Fvwm Wiki |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yoshi314
l33t
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 796
Location: PL
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 1:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
some corrections (imho) :
syslogd -> journal
crond -> systemd - time based service activation .i bet they'll come up with this soon, as they already figured out how to obsolete xinetd with socket based services
there is some neat streamlining going on that i actually like. systemd takes over responsibilities of various separate tools. of course there is a anti-unix philosophy argument, but i feel systemd takes over tasks that init should have been responsible for in the first place - stopping and starting services in any reasonable context applicable and not only bringing the system up/down without caring if a service fell over and needs to be restarted, or device required for its operation is available or not.
| Quote: | | Even if nothing changes from a user perspective right now, this is the first step to systemd doom on (almost) every box. |
udev is pretty much a must-have, kmod too. dbus is fairly necessary too. policykit/udisks are nice to have, and could become indispensable someday.
some of what you mentioned already happened. why aren't you panicking yet?
_________________
~amd64, ~x86
shrink your /usr/portage with squashfs+aufs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wswartzendruber
Veteran
Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 1196
Location: Jefferson, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| As long as it doesn't fail like NetworkManager (crashes when plugged into an IPv6-only router on Ubuntu and Fedora) then I'm fine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ant P.
Veteran
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 1916
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 3:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| They should get it over with already: merge pulseaudio in too, and rename the resulting mess to redhatd. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Veteran
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 1663
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| theBlackDragon wrote: | | So the project that caused the mess (udev) is merging with the project taking the wrong approach to solving the mess (systemd)? I don't see how this could go wrong. |
LMAO that is a classic quote :)
Kollin linked to the article in another thread:
Where does he get off with "For us, compatibility is key." ? They've completely screwed backward compatibility for people's setups over the years.
One ray of hope: at last Council meeting, Chainsaw said he'd maintain any patches needed to udev to keep running with /usr on lvm2 and no initramfs. So I guess, especially given that Gentoo officially uses openrc, that Gentoo will be one of the distros taking just the udev part of the sources for the udev package (when not using systemd ofc.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gorkypl
Guru
Joined: 04 Oct 2010
Posts: 440
Location: Kraków, PL
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 9:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I also initially thought it was meant to be announced on April 1st, what a shame...
| Ant P. wrote: | | They should get it over with already: merge pulseaudio in too, and rename the resulting mess to redhatd. |
...or just poeterringd
Do notice that the next logical step is merging cups into the libreoffice source tree.
_________________
BTW, TWM FTW! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
djdunn
l33t
Joined: 26 Dec 2004
Posts: 617
Location: Under the moon and all the stars in the sky.
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2012 6:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| theBlackDragon wrote: | | So the project that caused the mess (udev) is merging with the project taking the wrong approach to solving the mess (systemd)? I don't see how this could go wrong. |
I have to agree, if my professors beat anything into my brain about computer science, it was to do it right the first time...
if they aren't careful they are going to end up shooting themselves like xfree did
_________________
Now, with penguins, (cuddly such), "contented" means it has either just gotten laid, or it's stuffed on herring. Take it from me, I'm an expert on penguins, those are really the only two options.
--Linus Torvalds |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
miket
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 97
Location: Gainesville, FL, USA
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2012 8:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| djdunn wrote: |
| theBlackDragon wrote: |
So the project that caused the mess (udev) is merging with the project taking the wrong approach to solving the mess (systemd)? I don't see how this could go wrong. |
I have to agree, if my professors beat anything into my brain about computer science, it was to do it right the first time...
if they aren't careful they are going to end up shooting themselves like xfree did |
Like XFree did? How about they themselves have done? HAL, PolicyKit, ConsoleKit are all three must-have freedesktop.org projects that suddenly ended when the developers said "do over!" Trying out new ideas is one thing, but repeatedly plunging ahead with fresh-new stuff and demanding that all users act as beta testers is downright arrogant.
Compare this with Linux. Its maintenance proceeds at an amazing pace. I truly admire how Linus Torvalds manages all this potential chaos by keeping to clear principles about compatibility and the avoidance of breakage. A huge benefit of this restraint is that kernel upgrades are not occasions of huge outcry.
By contrast, churn seems to be a hallmark of the freedesktop.org release process. I'm afraid we've already seen how things will turn out with systemd: HAL started out as a good idea but got to be so large and unmaintainable that they just gave up. Doesn't careful software design have any role to play here?
The original author of HAL was Havoc Pennington. Without casting aspersions on him or his abilities, I point out that his name, Havoc, seems to characterize the freedesktop.org development process. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr.Willy
Apprentice
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
Posts: 287
Location: NRW, Germany
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2012 9:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| miket wrote: | | Trying out new ideas is one thing, but repeatedly plunging ahead with fresh-new stuff and demanding that all users act as beta testers is downright arrogant. |
Maybe - but the real problem is that they are not punished for it. The big DEs jump on their solutions and the udev alternatives are lacking.
There are always people who complain about something they don't like. Unless alternatives pop up and people start mass-migrating … if I were a dev I wouldn't give a damn. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16028
Location: Colorado
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wswartzendruber
Veteran
Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 1196
Location: Jefferson, USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Veteran
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 1663
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2012 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This post: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2011-May/msg00439.html really worries me:
| Quote: | The future of GNOME is as a Linux based OS..
Linux isn't an OS. Now it is our job to try to build one - finally. Let's do it. |
Where do they get off asserting that Linux is not an OS; what have I been running for over a decade? (And before you say "GNU/Linux" the statement implies that there is stuff they need to add that is not already available.)
It also implies they see their badly-designed bloatware as critical to what an OS is; and their developers are working on core Linux kernel software via udev and systemd (and all the stuff it needs like cgroups etc, where they do not seem to be interested in making sure things still work for users who do not use cgroups.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mrsteven
Veteran
Joined: 04 Jul 2003
Posts: 1878
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2012 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yoshi314 wrote: |
there is some neat streamlining going on that i actually like. systemd takes over responsibilities of various separate tools. of course there is a anti-unix philosophy argument, but i feel systemd takes over tasks that init should have been responsible for in the first place - stopping and starting services in any reasonable context applicable and not only bringing the system up/down without caring if a service fell over and needs to be restarted, or device required for its operation is available or not. |
In fact I do not directly have a problem with that. My problem is that applications will depend on systemd, its logger and/or its session management. Now, as far as I've read it, GNOME plans to depend on systemd for session management and drop ConsoleKit. This takes away freedom of choice, because now I am forced to replace my whole init system with something (probably) not well-enough tested. I also want my system logs to be human readable and not in a binary format. I'm afraid that someday I'll have no other choice than systemd and everything bad it brings with it.
Yes, I know, I can use another desktop environment than GNOME (in fact I do), but I fear KDE will also jump on the systemd bandwagon, especially with ConsoleKit being unmaintained now.
My problem is that Poettering and his friends are that arrogant about their software, they can't even imagine why someone does not want to use it. They push their stuff way to aggressively.
_________________
Unix philosophy: "Do one thing and do it well."
systemd: "Do everything and do it wrong." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wswartzendruber
Veteran
Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 1196
Location: Jefferson, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2012 9:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Static -> HAL -> *Kit -> systemd -> ???
So what's going to come after systemd? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1480
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 1:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Build it into the kernel?
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wswartzendruber
Veteran
Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 1196
Location: Jefferson, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 1:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BoneKracker wrote: | | Build it into the kernel? |
So let's say that you and I were in the same area. About how far away do you suppose I'd be? Oh, and what's the wind like there? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Off the Wall
