Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
When (and if) Gentoo will switch to systemd?
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 16, 17, 18  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Other Things Gentoo
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
steveL
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 2717
Location: The Peanut Gallery

PostPosted: Sat Jan 18, 2014 11:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

TomWij wrote:
depontius wrote:
Once upon a time I thought running the GNOME applications I liked, as well as the KDE applications I liked, as well as any other non-GNOME, non-KDE applications I liked was a perfectly acceptable practice.


Something similar happens here, as a GNOME user I want to use some KDE application(s) that I like; but, it comes at the pain of pulling in the big kde-base/kdelibs. Though, I hear KDE planned to split that up, would be nice but until then it's a really huge package that I otherwise don't need.

That's disingenuous of you: in both your cases you can (or could as depontius stated) run both sets of apps, without requiring changes to your init-system (of all things..)
That's what's changed, not whether you need a whole set of dependencies for a gnome or kde app, vs a gtk or qt app, which has always been par for the course.
depontius wrote:
I have gone back and masked gnome-3.8, and am running happily since. I also believe this could have been handled more gracefully. I don't think my usage case is that odd.

OFC it could: that's what the systemd and gnome3 (inheriting systemd) profiles were supposed to do: instead it was handled really badly, seemingly in order to push the agenda of "just switch because we tell you to."

WRT cgroups, I've not seen the Al Viro post: I saw Ted T'so's complaints and I didn't really buy them; of course cgroups provide another, direct interface to kernel "settings": that's the entire point of them. If you don't need them, don't use them. As they were they were reasonable: thorough and comprehensive in the Unix tradition. Given the idiot-box mentality of systemd-kitchensink developers, we're likely to end up with a much less useful and far harder to maintain interface for the admins who matter, imo.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 32099
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Sat Jan 18, 2014 1:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Red Hat is after the desktop market.
There will be a once in corporate history opportunity on 8 April 2014, to switch desktops away from Windows XP.

The obvious choice to accountants will be Windows 7/8 and new hardware all round or Red Hat windows with a period of adjustment and no hapdware bill.
The market opportunity here is huge. It far outweighs servers. In turn, Red Hat don't care about server admins.

If Red Hat fails to realise the Red Hat windows opportunity, I would not be surprised to see the systemd direction change.

Then, I'm old and cynical :) Red Hat may not be pushing Red Hat windows after all.
_________________
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
ulenrich
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 10 Oct 2010
Posts: 1160

PostPosted: Sat Jan 18, 2014 1:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

steveL wrote:
instead it was handled really badly, seemingly in order to push the agenda of "just switch because we tell you to."
@steveL please, before another conspiracy theory look at the gentoo bugs: You will find two poor guys not able to handle simple git techniques.

Every interested user knew this Gnome-3.8 move of upstream would come. Instead of having a close eye on how Gentoo will adopt further upstream, these kind of threads emerge in an ever the same manner. If you want to use Gnome applications in a sane way just put some of your competence into Gentoo maintainence via our bugtracker. And some of the most annoying things recently wouldn't happen ...

This Gnome-3.8 issue is a thing of last year, but Gnome-3.10 is about to emerge now. I wonder to see any users of this thread bugging about. With Kde it was possible to re-introduce a missed feature: to disable semantic- desktop. But Gnome users are not that kind of aware people who engage?
_________________
fun2gen2
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anon-E-moose
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 2370
Location: Dallas area

PostPosted: Sat Jan 18, 2014 2:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NeddySeagoon wrote:
Red Hat is after the desktop market.
There will be a once in corporate history opportunity on 8 April 2014, to switch desktops away from Windows XP.

The obvious choice to accountants will be Windows 7/8 and new hardware all round or Red Hat windows with a period of adjustment and no hapdware bill.
The market opportunity here is huge. It far outweighs servers. In turn, Red Hat don't care about server admins.

If Red Hat fails to realise the Red Hat windows opportunity, I would not be surprised to see the systemd direction change.

Then, I'm old and cynical :) Red Hat may not be pushing Red Hat windows after all.


I think that win7 is a safe bet, from those that I've talked too, they don't like win8.
Win8 is too much like gnome or ubuntu-net, ie a tablet type interface vs a desktop.

Yes, RH has lusted after the desktop market for quite a while.
I'm not so sure that systemd will do anything for them in that direction though.

And don't discount the server market, it may not be huge in number of seats,
but it brings in the money, by way of service contracts, etc.

MS tried mightly for years to unseat unix as the server king, and met with limited success.
_________________
Asus m5a99fx, FX 8320 - amd64-multilib, 3.15.9-zen, glibc-2.17, gcc-4.7.3-r1, eudev
xorg-server-1.16, openbox w/lxpanel, nouveau, oss4
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TomWij
Developer
Developer


Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1551

PostPosted: Sat Jan 18, 2014 3:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

steveL wrote:
TomWij wrote:
depontius wrote:
Once upon a time I thought running the GNOME applications I liked, as well as the KDE applications I liked, as well as any other non-GNOME, non-KDE applications I liked was a perfectly acceptable practice.


Something similar happens here, as a GNOME user I want to use some KDE application(s) that I like; but, it comes at the pain of pulling in the big kde-base/kdelibs. Though, I hear KDE planned to split that up, would be nice but until then it's a really huge package that I otherwise don't need.

That's disingenuous of you: in both your cases you can (or could as depontius stated) run both sets of apps, without requiring changes to your init-system (of all things..)
That's what's changed, not whether you need a whole set of dependencies for a gnome or kde app, vs a gtk or qt app, which has always been par for the course.


Hence that is why it is similar; that is a resemblance without being identical, it shows a frustration without it being about the exact same matter. As for the very last part, KDE vs Qt however is a big difference...

depontius wrote:
It seems to me that systemd either requires a very specialized rescue CD to do that, or may render some of the things that I did difficult-to-impossible. Can someone comment on rescuing a systemd system? And DON'T tell me that systemd systems "just work" and don't need rescuing. I won't believe that one.


If you need them; you can specify kernel parameters for debugging purposes, see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_Systemd_problems and https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/systemd#Diagnosing_boot_problems for instance.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
steveL
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 2717
Location: The Peanut Gallery

PostPosted: Tue Jan 21, 2014 3:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TomWij wrote:
steveL wrote:
That's what's changed, not whether you need a whole set of dependencies for a gnome or kde app, vs a gtk or qt app, which has always been par for the course.


Hence that is why it is similar; that is a resemblance without being identical, it shows a frustration without it being about the exact same matter. As for the very last part, KDE vs Qt however is a big difference...

Not at all: you changed the point from being about the options closed off by systemd, to one about required deps, which has got nothing to do with it. If you want a KDE app, you need certain kdelibs, just as you need some Gnome libs for Gnome apps (and there is a large difference between Gnome and GTK deps, just as there is with KDE vs Qt.) But prior to now, neither of those requirements closed off your options elsewhere in the stack, nor did any base dependencies have such implications for the rest of the system, such as forcing what syslog implementation you use.

It's a very big difference, and in fact the point that was being made to you. Trying to merge that into "required deps" is disingenuous, and wilfully ignoring the point, imo.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TomWij
Developer
Developer


Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1551

PostPosted: Tue Jan 21, 2014 3:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What point is this even about? For it to be similar I needed to change the point, hence that is what makes it different; can you please stop trying to make different similar things the same? My statement is as off-topic as depontius' statement; they both avoid the point of discussion, because they are just random informal thoughts out of frustration rather than a formal constructive discussion.

Last edited by TomWij on Tue Jan 21, 2014 3:57 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anon-E-moose
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 2370
Location: Dallas area

PostPosted: Tue Jan 21, 2014 3:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

steveL wrote:
Trying to merge that into "required deps" is disingenuous, and wilfully ignoring the point, imo.


I would just ignore him, as you can't win with a troll.
This is why I keep him on ignore.
As in the past all you will get is a run around and make no real headway.
But that's what he's hoping for.
_________________
Asus m5a99fx, FX 8320 - amd64-multilib, 3.15.9-zen, glibc-2.17, gcc-4.7.3-r1, eudev
xorg-server-1.16, openbox w/lxpanel, nouveau, oss4
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16114
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Thu Jan 23, 2014 9:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anon-E-moose wrote:
steveL wrote:
Trying to merge that into "required deps" is disingenuous, and wilfully ignoring the point, imo.


I would just ignore him, as you can't win with a troll.
This is why I keep him on ignore.
As in the past all you will get is a run around and make no real headway.
But that's what he's hoping for.
This isn't Off The Wall, so please lets remain courteous. Thanks.

@steveL: Neither does the conversation seem to need overly strong language such as "willful" and "disingenuous." As I read TomWij's comment regarding the comparison, I interpreted his post to be about the frustration, not a comparison of any actual or perceived forcing of an init system change.



Thanks.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
666threesixes666
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 31 May 2011
Posts: 1241
Location: 42.68n 85.41w

PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2014 6:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
depontius wrote:
It seems to me that systemd either requires a very specialized rescue CD to do that, or may render some of the things that I did difficult-to-impossible. Can someone comment on rescuing a systemd system? And DON'T tell me that systemd systems "just work" and don't need rescuing. I won't believe that one.


should just be anything with chroot. i setup my system to openrc & systemd by selection at boot via following lilo https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Lilo wiki page. wiki needs some sort of method to note recommended brews / tested functional brews and possibly note who is signing off on tested + working / recommended. i personally use ubuntu flash keys to rescue anything / everything. most everyone else suggests using sysrescuecd, i dont because you have to emerge any lacking features instead of instantly pulling them from upstream binary repositories. afaik openrc is same as systemd when in chroot... both disabled, both not initiated by init....

i like having exact granular control over my installed system, and the ability to treat the rescue disk as an easy in easy out throw away distro.

jerry springer style final thought:
systemd is software, it will not hurt your pocket protector. why so much hostility surrounds this software baffles me. why this software frustrates so many people also baffles me. i like redundancy in boot loaders, init systems, hell id take redundancy in kernels too if it were possible. lilo + linux + openrc known working suggested.... lilo + gnu hurd + systemd, show me the goodies!
_________________
cat /etc/*-release
Funtoo Linux - baselayout 2.2.0
consider this warning no. 1
https://wiki.gentoo.org/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/666threesixes666&offset=&limit=500&target=666threesixes666
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dominique_71
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 1505
Location: Switzerland (Romandie)

PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2014 6:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The question in the title is the wrong one. It is a long time ago than systemd is part of portage, and no body was forced to use it. Some gnome users cannot like it, but if they are forced to use systemd, this is not because of gentoo but because of gnome. So the correct question is who want to force us to use systemd?

That said, I try Debian it was a few weeks ago. Systemd was installed, and I done the same cgroup configuration I am used to use on gentoo, that with 1 real time cpu group for the audio applications. That was the beginning of the nightmare. All was working fine at the exception of this f. systemd that insisted to put whatever it think is good to have into my real time cpu cgroup. The result was a freezing box with even dead magic keys

I lost at least 2 weeks trying every thing I can found on the web and think about. Finally, I re formatted the HDD and installed gentoo into it. Some weeks later, I begun to take a look from the inside at systemd, and I subscribed to their list. That's not even an alpha quality software. Reports of bugs and failures are continuously coming from every where. I would never release a software that is so full with issues.

Also, I get a discussion with the guys on that list, and for them GNU/Linux was never, and never will be, about freedom. This is a statement which is in full contradiction with the essence of free software which is about liberty, and liberty was always, and always will be, about freedom. I am also subscribed to the LAD (Linux Audio Development). And some of the best developers on that list, even if one of them is using systemd, wrote the same thing about it : The main problem with systemd is that instead of providing means to implement policies, it implement the policies, which imply systemd is already a bigger problem than the one it was intended to solve.

Now, if we look at the big picture, the cgroups developers are redesigning the cgroups in the kernel. When done, if no body make an alternative implementation, it will be only one daemon able to control the cgroups: systemd. That's the goal at the core of the system level. If we take a look at what is going on at freedesktop, more or less the same gang of peoples is working to promote gnome, kde, wayland, systemd, and eventually xfce, and they really give the impression to don't care about compatibility with the rest of the GNU/Linux community.

All that imply they are promoting a shift in comparison of what, the kde3 to kde4 mess will be just a kid game. Wayland is a good idea, but it have a major issue: X and all its extensions are just to complicated in order to think that a compatibility layer will be able to provide a decent compatibility. That's just too much work and no body will do it. So what those folks should be doing instead of consciously breaking GNU/Linux, is to do their own OS.
_________________
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading that text: please consider ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
schorsch_76
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 19 Jun 2012
Posts: 212

PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2014 7:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dominique_71 wrote:
Also, I get a discussion with the guys on that list, and for them GNU/Linux was never, and never will be, about freedom. This is a statement which is in full contradiction with the essence of free software which is about liberty, and liberty was always, and always will be, about freedom. I am also subscribed to the LAD (Linux Audio Development). And some of the best developers on that list, even if one of them is using systemd, wrote the same thing about it : The main problem with systemd is that instead of providing means to implement policies, it implement the policies, which imply systemd is already a bigger problem than the one it was intended to solve.


Could you please provide a link to that message or discussion?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dominique_71
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 1505
Location: Switzerland (Romandie)

PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2014 9:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

schorsch_76 wrote:
Dominique_71 wrote:
Also, I get a discussion with the guys on that list, and for them GNU/Linux was never, and never will be, about freedom. This is a statement which is in full contradiction with the essence of free software which is about liberty, and liberty was always, and always will be, about freedom. I am also subscribed to the LAD (Linux Audio Development). And some of the best developers on that list, even if one of them is using systemd, wrote the same thing about it : The main problem with systemd is that instead of providing means to implement policies, it implement the policies, which imply systemd is already a bigger problem than the one it was intended to solve.


Could you please provide a link to that message or discussion?


On systemd-devel, the discussion start here. That was not an easy discussion because I come with my questions after the problem and with no mean to copy and past configurations and logs.

On the LAD, you can see that post.
_________________
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading that text: please consider ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]


Last edited by Dominique_71 on Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:32 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
schorsch_76
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 19 Jun 2012
Posts: 212

PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2014 9:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The link to the systemd-devel list seems broken ....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
XavierMiller
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 23 Jul 2004
Posts: 5566
Location: ~Brussels - Belgique

PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2014 9:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

it's ".html" ;)
_________________
Xavier Miller
(FR) Merci de respecter les règles du forum.
http://www.xaviermiller.be
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anon-E-moose
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 2370
Location: Dallas area

PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2014 10:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The 1st link is broken (404)
the 2nd works.
_________________
Asus m5a99fx, FX 8320 - amd64-multilib, 3.15.9-zen, glibc-2.17, gcc-4.7.3-r1, eudev
xorg-server-1.16, openbox w/lxpanel, nouveau, oss4
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anon-E-moose
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 2370
Location: Dallas area

PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dominique_71 wrote:
The question in the title is the wrong one. It is a long time ago than systemd is part of portage, and no body was forced to use it. Some gnome users cannot like it, but if they are forced to use systemd, this is not because of gentoo but because of gnome. So the correct question is who want to force us to use systemd?


There are certainly a few "gentoo devs" who have seriously made a push for systemd to be the standard.
I find that type attitude a little bothersome, since they have undue influence on the direction of gentoo
as they can impose their views by just deleting certain packages.

But right now there is choice.

Edit to add: I think highly of most of the gentoo devs, there are only a few that I consider detrimental to gentoo.
I don't trust them as far as I can throw an elephant and that is based on their past behavior and their antics.
_________________
Asus m5a99fx, FX 8320 - amd64-multilib, 3.15.9-zen, glibc-2.17, gcc-4.7.3-r1, eudev
xorg-server-1.16, openbox w/lxpanel, nouveau, oss4


Last edited by Anon-E-moose on Fri Jan 24, 2014 1:26 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dominique_71
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 1505
Location: Switzerland (Romandie)

PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I know I am maybe over reacting, but it is a very long story that between Lennart and the LAD, which begun even before pulseaudio. He was trying to impose his view about rt operations to a community which was used to it from many years, which was listening to him, and which was coming back with strong technical evidences. And Lennart answered you are "desktop haters". It is even an article about that into the LWN. And that kind of reactions is a constant with him, so he must not be surprised if a lot of peoples much more skilled than me are criticizing him and his work.
_________________
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading that text: please consider ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anon-E-moose
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 2370
Location: Dallas area

PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2014 1:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The problem with the systemd people is that they've stuck their heads in the sand or some other dark place
and refuse to recognize that maybe the path they are on isn't as good as they first thought.
It's an arrogant attitude, but pretty much the same one that was displayed when HAL was being
pushed, by several of the same people that now are working on systemd.

Yes, there are good arguments for a need for a new init package,
but systemd isn't an init package, it's a kitchen sink that has init capabilities.
Which is a different matter entirely.

Once again, they think that linux needs to somehow "conquer" the
desktop as that is the only thing they can see. Very short sighted in the
scheme of things. And thus the mad rush to emulate a windows like system
and monopoly.

I have to agree that it's basically alpha level software, and nothing wrong
with that, except for the pushing as if it was a solid piece of software.
They could and should have taken their time to roll it out properly with
proper long term testing but someone or some entity decided that it
was good enough to conquer the desktop with. Time will tell.

It's interesting that it's being driven by gnome, and from what I've seen
discussed in various places, they're losing as many people leaving gnome
as they are in gaining people adopting it.
_________________
Asus m5a99fx, FX 8320 - amd64-multilib, 3.15.9-zen, glibc-2.17, gcc-4.7.3-r1, eudev
xorg-server-1.16, openbox w/lxpanel, nouveau, oss4
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Shamus397
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 03 Apr 2005
Posts: 163
Location: Ur-th

PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 5:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have to say that what I've encountered from systemd supporters is borne out by what other people have reported here: if you don't like systemd for any reason, you are a luddite, someone who is a Lennart hater, an idiot, etc. To say that the fervor surrounding systemd supporters is almost religious, well, that would be understating it. ;)

So far, systemd has been confined to a fairly small area distro-wise. So when I see Debian starting to seriously considering making it the default init system (see here), it makes me wonder just what the hell is going on? OpenRC works fine as an alt init system, why in the world would Debian even consider switching to the kitchen sink disaster that is systemd? What am I missing here? :?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 32099
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 6:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Shamus397,

For a binary distro, its

a) drop Gnome
b) make systemd the init system for an 'easy' life
c) support the added complexity of Gnome/systemd Anything Else/other init

For binary distros there are no good solutions, b) is the least worst ... until systemd goes the way of HAL.
_________________
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
steveL
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 2717
Location: The Peanut Gallery

PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 2:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

pjp wrote:
@steveL: Neither does the conversation seem to need overly strong language such as "willful" and "disingenuous."

He ignored the point a second time: that makes it wilfully disingenuous in my book. *shrug*
Quote:
As I read TomWij's comment regarding the comparison, I interpreted his post to be about the frustration, not a comparison of any actual or perceived forcing of an init system change.

The content was, but what he was actually doing in the context of the discussion, was merging the standard irritation of heavy dependencies, with a requirement for systemd which in turn imposes a whole slew of choices in disparate areas that have nothing to do with the desktop, nor its "experience". It's a standard discussion tactic, no doubt it has some fancy name. And TomWij has made a habit in the past of holding us all to the forms and etiquette of debating. Again *shrug*

Let's leave it there: just explaining my side, and no wish to pursue the topic any further.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
steveL
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 2717
Location: The Peanut Gallery

PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 2:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

NeddySeagoon wrote:
For a binary distro, its

a) drop Gnome
b) make systemd the init system for an 'easy' life
c) support the added complexity of Gnome/systemd Anything Else/other init

For binary distros there are no good solutions, b) is the least worst ... until systemd goes the way of HAL.

Well the easiest, with the short-term thinking that is so prevalent often considered the best; until one looks back at years of headaches and thinks "never again".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BitJam
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 12 Aug 2003
Posts: 2454
Location: Silver City, NM

PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

666threesixes666 wrote:
... why so much hostility surrounds this software baffles me. why this software frustrates so many people also baffles me. i like redundancy in boot loaders, init systems, ...

One aspect of systemd that creates hostility and frustration is its march towards lock-in and monoculture which is the exact opposite of the type of redundancy you claim you like. For example, if you want to use Gnome your choice of init systems is reduced to one. Another reason it generates strong emotions is that these lock-in tactics are similar to the tactics used by large corporate software monopolies. In addition, the design philosophy (or lack thereof) is not user or peer friendly. Again, it reminds me of the paternalistic and patronizing approach of large corporate software monopolies.

If I wanted to have stuff like that in my life then I might as well go back to working in industry where I would get paid big bucks for my trouble.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
depontius
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 2585

PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 12:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

666threesixes666 wrote:

jerry springer style final thought:
systemd is software, it will not hurt your pocket protector. why so much hostility surrounds this software baffles me. why this software frustrates so many people also baffles me. i like redundancy in boot loaders, init systems, hell id take redundancy in kernels too if it were possible. lilo + linux + openrc known working suggested.... lilo + gnu hurd + systemd, show me the goodies!


For me software is quite political. I preceive systemd as getting shoved down my throat, and it's not just systemd, but along with it systemd-logind, systemd-syslog (or whatever it's called) and systemd-<whatever they choose to roll into systemd next>. I feel that my freedoms are being infringed, because choice is being taken away. Keep in mind the L.P. has said that he wants to push a systemd monoculture into Linux, though not in those words, and there is a large group with him in that wish.

The other thing about my RescueCD question was that I wasn't sure how to actually chroot into a systemd system, then do systemd-type things. Even with OpenRC, once you chroot in, you can't necessarily start OpenRC services, because the whole predonditino needs/provides set isn't met.
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Other Things Gentoo All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 16, 17, 18  Next
Page 4 of 18

 
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