Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Gentoo folks, this is your wakeup call(sysd-udev)
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Other Things Gentoo
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
The Doctor
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Jul 2010
Posts: 1493

PostPosted: Thu Jul 10, 2014 2:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Standardization is good, but only if it is standardization to a good idea.

If there are, say, 200 ways to do X the best standardization is for competition to knock out 199 of the ones that are badly designed/poorly managed. An upstream source that announces "Y is the new standard and no others will be supported!" is the worst way because it almost certainly isn't the best solution. Good ideas stand on their own. Bad stand because they are supported by militant individuals.

I have no problem with systemd existing. I have no problem with people thinking it is the best solution. What I do have a problem with is people thinking that it should be forced on everyone as the new "standard." If it is worthy of that title it should earn it by proving that it solves problems that need to be solved, ie by providing functionality lacking in other solutions. As far as I can tell, systemd does not.

The process of beating out competition is why Apple became the standard PC until IBM took it over, then yielded to the IBM clones. Each one did something better than their predecessors. Sure, none of them where/are perfect, but if you hold out for perfection...

When IBM tried to announce the new standard OS/2 simply died forgotten.


Oh, and I don't think I need to say what the dominant server OS is and why :wink:
_________________
First things first, but not necessarily in that order.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khayyam
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 2244

PostPosted: Thu Jul 10, 2014 12:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

krinn wrote:
khayyam wrote:
saellaven wrote:
All the yeses need to go IMO

saellaven ... I simply can't agree with you on that.

And i agree with him.

krinn ... my point was that indeed it is an issue (or, as I called it, a "crisis of governance"), but that I would lean toward giving those involved the benefit of the doubt. This is because often in politics proving the intent behind an action is more complex than "x voted yes therefore" (as Neddy pointed out), and we have numerous examples in history where "needs to go" effectively results in purges, exclusions, etc, of persons that serve no positive purpose (and often negative ones). Saellaven was stating his opinion and I mine, I would much rather see the wider political process (our discussion here for instance) place checks on the decisions made, and that our sense of justice be more inline with "truth and reconciliation" than exclusion. Again, I take this stance because for any political process to work there needs to be recognition that 1). we don't all agree, 2). that we often make mistakes and/or act without thinking of consequences, and 3). justice often requires that we are capable of seeing past disagreement and apply reason to things that on an emotional level we generally don't (such as our natural inclination to have revenge for a harm done).

The example you provide of williamH and the initramfs vote is, I think, damning, but again I'm not inclined to see malice but human fallibility and arrogance. The suggestions for what particular roles should be allowed concurrently I agree with entirely, but this issue is in itself more difficult than perhaps we might acknowledge as keeping things neat-and-tidy with all parties in agreement and a proper separation of powers is one of the most difficult tasks a community can take on, and we should expect that it fails, requires constant attention, re-framing, etc, etc.

best ... khay

ps. sorry, somehow missed this post so didn't respond at the time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
saellaven
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 286

PostPosted: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yamakuzure wrote:
saellaven wrote:
The patches exist to make OpenRC work fine with a separate /usr
Nothing works fine with a separate not early mounted /usr. For years. Too many things have gone from /lib and /bin to /usr/lib and /usr/bin over the years. I took the short route: Merged back /usr into /, because there is absolutely *no* advantage in separating usr from rootfs. (Unless you use ZFS and want different compression variants. But then, you need an initramfs anyway...)


In 20+ years of using Linux, I have ALWAYS had a separate /usr (and boot, home, tmp and var) and everything works just fine... Why? Because the files necessary to bring a system up are all located in /. It's only due to dev (upstream, not Gentoo) ignorance and arrogance that system-critical stuff was ever put in /usr. Rather than correct that ignorance, RH (via systemd, Fedora, etc) decided it was better to move EVERYTHING to /usr and make /usr the real root (usrmerge).

udev used to work just fine with a separate /usr and then Poettering decided that, since he doesn't see a need for a separate /usr (again, showing his ignorance), there was never a need for a separate /usr so udev, now a part of systemd, wouldn't support it (arrogance). So, he willfully REMOVED support from udev to make it technologically inferior (sending patches, as some suggest, won't help because this is a political crusade on the part of someone intentionally removing support). It's my understanding that systemd actually does support a separate /usr now, but I can't verify that as it will not touch my system ever.

Rather than continue to leave OpenRC more robust, WilliamH used his power as lead of OpenRC and as a Council member, to intentionally cripple OpenRC AND Gentoo, in favor of systemd (a herd he also belongs to). In light of separate /usr being re-enabled in systemd, this becomes even more asinine. Further, the decision to force an initramfs was made with no concern of the breakages it would cause (and there have been a lot of them).

The Council went so far as to say that, after one month from the vote, new packages or updates of old packages entering the system can INTENTIONALLY break systems that don't play the pre-mounted /usr game... meaning that they are free to break util-linux so your system won't boot if you have a separate /usr to apply political pressure via intentional technical inferiority.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krinn
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 4296

PostPosted: Thu Jul 10, 2014 3:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

khayyam wrote:
we have numerous examples in history where "needs to go" effectively results in purges, exclusions, etc, of persons that serve no positive purpose (and often negative ones).

As they just fail in the role they own, for any reason, it is at "best" incompetence, assuming they were good faith. You don't need to push them out, but it would be so unwise to vote again for them after that.
Of course the vote remain to other devs hands, and politic is already at work there, and systemd gang is working to get again the power to redo what they have done, keeping hands on Council.
Look at that, (not real quote, a quick resume) "that dev sucks to be council member as he has only post one time..." from http://blogs.gentoo.org/mgorny/2014/07/09/the-council-and-the-community/
That's political attack over another Council candidate, yeah systemd propaganda tend to gave bad habit over systemd fans... from that dev that also write that : http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki//usr_move

I do hope over devs have eyes wild open... As with any vote, candidates are important, but voters generally forget they own a big power in it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TomWij
Developer
Developer


Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1551

PostPosted: Thu Jul 10, 2014 6:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

khayyam wrote:
Tom ... no, its a political fact, that is why we have laws that attempt to prevent abuse of power, absolutism, monopoly, etc, and a legal system where we enshrine rights and duties. We do this because we understand that it isn't simply a matter of "choosing" one product over another but that principles underscore jus.

No, because time, effort, etc, are also "things" and so have some material value in the circulation of goods. It doesn't matter if the contribution is made up of words, carrots, or bytes, they all require physical inputs and so are a resources that involve expenditure in one form or another. The gifting of books was there to illustrate "rights and duties" not the transfer of goods (which you are still focused on ... strange as this was what I was countering with that particular paragraph/example). It absolutely doesn't matter what form the contribution takes "rights and duties" are still involved (if, that is, our principles are to have any meaning).

These "rights and duties" are operative wherever there are social arrangements, even in animals. They needn't be codified as they often function without the need to be so. You would find it a violation of the most basic if these if I lied about you, or caused you intentional harm, you may even consider it your duty to retaliate, or prevent me from doing the same to others, should this occur. It has nothing to do with ebuilds, overlays, or what-have-you, you're completely speaking past the point I was making.

Again you're ignoring the central point of what the "polluting the water supply" analogy is all about. When I pollute the water upstream from you I do not bare the negative effects of my action, you do. So, its not "bidirectional". Remember where I started with this ... it was about "community", and what the "rights and duties" of a community involve, polluting *your* water supply, lying about you, or doing you intentional harm, violate principles of jus.


It is a political fact that dilutes in practice as prevention attempts aren't silver bullets, the same goes for alternative products; both are sliders that control which products get chosen. It matters what these are made up of, as contributions can be "given" or "kept"; this determines whether the products have an internal or external circulation, which relates to ownership. One can have social arrangements with oneself or a group of relatives, as pointed out; yes, in that case it doesn't have anything to do with that enumeration or external circulation.

This is bidirectional as the actions against the repercussions reflect upon them, that is a central point I bring forward; which definitely ignores the unidirectional point, because it is orthogonal and gives an Uncle Sam impression instead of an impression alike the recent Apple (eg. maps app) / Black Friday / Gap / Juiced / Tim Hortons / Twinings / Verizon / Union Bank "customer fights back" success stories. One step further, there are companies out there that one day had a global market share but are now near bankruptcy due to such sliders.

Water pollution will cause people to tell their relatives, to look for other water and to create competitive companies claiming to not pollute their water. Now consider why people switch from Windows to Linux, as well as how that affects their market shares; every so often, there is "government X (or company Y) has switched operating system" news...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khayyam
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 2244

PostPosted: Thu Jul 10, 2014 6:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

krinn ... yeah, the mgórny peice was particularly ironic given his statement that "[t]he teams need to predict how the decision will affect the Community, how it will affect the users and the contributors." With upstreams "policy" and his place on the systemd team that in my opinion is double-speak.

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


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 2244

PostPosted: Thu Jul 10, 2014 8:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tom ... most of what you have written above is what I would call gibberish, you have used all manner of misdirection, and in places, absurdity ("social arrangements with oneself") and I can't help but think you are either out of your depth or desperate to seem that the subject matter is something you have some deep knowledge of. Whats worse is (again) you have not responded to the substance of what I wrote, and chose to remove the context of what was written from where it was written ... something that is important if we are to have some kind of dialogue. Up until now I've been attempting to ignore your lack of focus and simply return to the points, hoping that if I keep drawing your attention to them something might click. They are not difficult or complex, in fact I thought by drawing your attention to how you might feel, and react, if I were to lie about, or intentionally harm you, you might instantly recognise the reasons why we regard polluting the water upstream as socially irresponsible, and how such an act is a unidirectional violation of your right not to bare the negative effects of my actions ... but no ... even such a simple idea you are not willing to grasp so as to comprehend the point I was making. Maybe one of your "sliders" will adjust the level of pollution, slander, or harm, you are forced to endure ... but this is entirely besides the point. Its my actions which are the root cause, and again, as we are talking about "community" such an action violates the rules (whether codified or not) that establish and makes possible that community. Note how I keep returning to this same point and how I focus my argument on the expression of that point no matter which way you twist and turn, that is because its a subject I've spent many year studying, and in great detail, so if you want to have a discussion you had better come to the table with something of more substance than the above.

best ... khay
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: Thu Jul 10, 2014 9:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

khayyam wrote:
Tom ... most of what you have written above is what I would call gibberish...


One only has to ponder for a minuscule moment why he shows up on these types of threads with the gibberish
that he does and the answer will come of it's own. He doesn't want dialog but the absence of it as it pertains
to systemd, LP/RH/Gentoo council and anything pertaining to their motives.
_________________
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: Fri Jul 11, 2014 9:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

khayyam ... That is because the topical central point is of interest to me, which mismatches your point; given neither of us has interest in each other's point and you respond to tone rather than (dis)agree, do not expect a topical dialogue between us. We're at the point to agree to disagree, as we talk about different topics. If you were interested in returning to the topical central point that is brought forward, you wouldn't ignore it through twist and turns to be about your point instead; as you now have shown to have no interest, further attempts are unnecessary. Due to your study you are focused on one non-topical vision, that you don't see or accept the other; the topical central point is of substance, but given tunnel vision it can take months or years for you to see and accept it.

If you continue to ride on your non-topical train, don't expect further responses from me; so, no, there will be no click and my clean water wagon will diverge as an effected party that responds differently.

Anon-E-moose ... Why do you wonder, you were already told; if you drop your ignore script, you will see. Indeed, actions are more powerful than dialog; unless dialog leads to actions, which we're yet to see as a topical response to this "wakeup call" thread.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khayyam
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 2244

PostPosted: Fri Jul 11, 2014 10:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

TomWij wrote:
khayyam ... That is because the topical central point is of interest, which mismatches your point; given neither of us has interest in each other's point, do not expect a topical dialogue between us. We're at the point to agree to disagree, as we talk about different topics. If you were interested in returning to the topical central point that is brought forward, you wouldn't ignore it; as you now have shown to have no interest in it, further attempts are unnecessary. Due to your study you're so focused on one non-topical vision, that you don't see or accept others; the topic is of substance, but given tunnel vision it can take years to see and accept it.

Tom ... no, its not some "mismatch" but a case of your muddying the water so that the "central point" (that is, *the* topic I raised) is lost, obscured, and buried under your constant misdirection. Its you who are engaging in "ignoring" in that for you the "central point" is open to be re-conceptualised in some other domain with no reference to that "central point". Now you want to "agree to disagree" as though you actually engaged with that "central point" in some substantive way. Further, you create a smoke screen by attributing the fact that I have kept focus on this "central point" to my "tunnel vision" so as to make it seem that this is some *real* discussion in which we "disagree". These are tactics that attempt to undermine, disrupt, and cause this "central point" to disappear, and I will not accept such behaviour as it is intellectually dishonest. If you persist in this nonsense I will take it as a personal affront and either cease to treat you with some level of respect, or seek recourse.

tentatively ... khay
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
steveL
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 2720
Location: The Peanut Gallery

PostPosted: Fri Jul 11, 2014 10:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh, God, yaf thread full of nonsense gibberish, repeated over and over as if that somehow renders it semantically non-null. It doesn't. It's still crap, however many ways you try to sell it.

And as usual, the vague hint at a threat, since you're being "non-topical."

NO. The bulshytt is off-topic, and is what kills these threads; afaic that's deliberate. You always see systemd-fanbois pop up and repeat vague mantras of utter nonsense, if they're not linking to utterly specious arguments which amount to nothing more to claims to authority from a complete nub and his sidekick. Then they point out that you're not actually getting anywhere with the real discussion, neglecting to mention that they're the reason why.

I for one am fed up of all the politicking from people who clearly have zero clue, but evidently lots of free time to stop everyone else making progress with any sort of alternative.

They're good at blocking true progress; not so good for the rest of us. And I note they appear to be splitting the threads up, and taking on one each. Well at least it's better than watching them argue pedantically with each other.

edit: I see khayyam has blown it out of the water again. I wonder what fresh nonsense we'll hear in response.
Personally I find it insulting; to the user community and to the forums.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TomWij
Developer
Developer


Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1551

PostPosted: Fri Jul 11, 2014 11:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

How can your "let's continue to rest asleep" point be seen as the central point when the topic of the thread and my replies is "Gentoo folks, this is your wakeup call(sysd-udev)" which asks for progress?

Well, I'm out to pursue another progressive way; have a nice day...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khayyam
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 2244

PostPosted: Fri Jul 11, 2014 11:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

TomWij wrote:
How can your "resting asleep" be seen as the central point when the topic of the thread is "Gentoo folks, this is your wakeup call(sysd-udev)"?

Tom ... I assume that question is directed at me? Its not that illusive, I replied to your "[...] these questions depend on how much we as a community contribute." So, the central point I was discussing from the outset is what this community consists of, what the "rights and duties" of the various parts of that community are (given that the question of what that community "contributes" was raised). I've had to keep on restating that "central point" as you have been deftly trying to muddy the water, and otherwise distract from that "central question".

I did warn you that I would take any further nonsense from you as a personal affront, and so your presenting my input as somehow equatable to the suggestion of "resting asleep" ... an obvious attempt to undermine me with the black art of negative association ... I'm simply done playing nice with you.

pfffttttttttt .... khay

ps. up to your "ninja editing" again ... how annoying. Anyhow, the full unexpurgated "first post" is above.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TomWij
Developer
Developer


Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1551

PostPosted: Fri Jul 11, 2014 12:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

khayyam ... your first reply was to a rhetorical question with no question mark, the surrounding statement is based on the outcome of that; not so much on the details of the cause to that, as those details are hard to change and therefore I'd like to not discuss them as they "turn around" and step away from the full picture. "Resting asleep" is an impression from your detailed disagreements, apparently my false assumption; but given that you correct me, do I understand correctly that you instead intend to question it? Did you pull a devil's advocate?

ps. The editing is an habit carried on from Q&A sites where editing posts is very welcome to improve their content; as to make the posts more readable, insightful and to the point.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krinn
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 4296

PostPosted: Fri Jul 11, 2014 1:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TomWij wrote:
How can your "let's continue to rest asleep" point be seen as the central point when the topic of the thread and my replies is "Gentoo folks, this is your wakeup call(sysd-udev)" which asks for progress?


And we clearly made the point that the subject is not weaking-up.
This is just another insult from lennart to Gentoo community that suggest Gentoo is sleeping and distro using systemd are awake and move forward...
The only real answer to that would just be the Gentoo community insulting pottering back. But that would be as lame as him.

- First: Gentoo have systemd too.
- Second: and that's the whole point of that thread, moving forward not systemd path is not sleeping.
- Third: because now systemd path impose another treat on udev alone itself, pottering is attacking Gentoo and any distro not using ONLY systemd.

Now we have choices :
- Going systemd only path like pottering's dream
- Keep udev alive with a fork. That's already done by eudev.
- Keep udev alive and fight what pottering is doing on it, that's an hard path, ssuominen already and has told many times he will do that as long as humanly possible. Nobody put any credit to pottering mouth, the Gentoo community knows from the start pottering will do that to udev one day, and more soon than later ; but i think even sometimes his choices weren't the best to my taste, I and the community as a whole think ssuominen credits are full and we trust him to keep doing the good work he has done in the past like he told us.
- Drop systemd and udev ; udev is still maintain by ssuominen. But if pottering doesn't stop his crazy attacks, that's something Gentoo should really think about. It's no better than real life, animals always flee, but once they couldn't, they fight back. What pottering doesn't see is the fleeing path of Gentoo is maintain ONLY by ssuominen... If ssuominen resign, we will have no choice than be full systemd or drop systemd. And he better rethink his strategy, as right now, i do think the community will drop systemd than adopt it (and it is something systemd gang in Gentoo see, that's why they fight hard for it), kinda logic ; Gentoo remain openrc and any non invading init system as long as Council is there to protect Gentoo, and systemd lovers have already a backup with sabayon linux. So Council is the key there... Taking Council is the key to take Gentoo.

So nothing really change, except pottering push the limits higher, making ssuominen work harder and harder. The community has from a long time start thinking if his work was really worth the effort (hence eudev), now that systemd upstream also start to discuss his position, the chair must be really uncomfortable to sit on. But even i personally think it's not worth the effort, nobody can deny ssuominen is doing the work. He is a Gentoo dev and he is doing the work upstream is not doing, upstream doesn't even see if he wasn't there, udev would had been out of Gentoo from a long time. Something everyone would expect upstream to provide thanks, not a systemd-hater tag.
I think pottering is starting to loose patience and see ssuominen's work now as a bugger to his "grand" plan : Linux is systemd, systemd is readhat, Linux is redhat...

So we don't need to speak about waking up, Gentoo is just not sleeping. The thread is about pottering new attack over udev alone and distro not using systemd. And my part was to highlight Council key part as election are coming so devs see how important it is to keep Council safe from systemd dictator hands.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khayyam
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 2244

PostPosted: Fri Jul 11, 2014 1:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TomWij wrote:
that quote is a rhetorical question with no question mark, the surrounding statement is based on the outcome of that; not so much on the details of the cause to that, as those details are hard to change. "Resting asleep" is an impression from your disagreements in further detail; but given that you correct me, do I understand correctly that you instead intend to question the details?

Tom ... if the question was rhetorical or not it doesn't matter, the point I made is response is none the less pertinent to the subject of this thread. If we are a community then we should expect that parts of that community do not take actions that effect the entire community without acknowledging what those actions entail. I brought in the "pollution of the water supply" analogy as this was that very same question and so it too was pertinent. I keep pointing to it as you keep avoiding it, and muddying the water. The fact that this is "hard to change" doesn't matter in the least as it is a principle that is in question, so its not something of a "detail" but the central issue around which all others will gravitate. I haven't raised any "disagreements" (other than pointing to the implications of those actions, and how it is framed) as I've been too busy constantly trying to get you to acknowledge that one simple fact. You have described this as "[r]esting asleep" and I have stated or implied no such thing, I challenge you to defend that negative assessment, as nothing I have stated has any such connotation.

TomWij wrote:
The editing is an habit that is carried on from Q&A sites where editing your own and others posts is very welcome to improve their content; as to make the posts more readable, insightful and to the point.

Its a bad "habit" in this context as it means that the I have to contend with a response which subsequently may change.

tentitively ... khay
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John R. Graham
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 08 Mar 2005
Posts: 7840
Location: Somewhere over Atlanta, Georgia

PostPosted: Fri Jul 11, 2014 1:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Folks, we don't really need another one of these threads. If you want to make further comments, let me refer you to our fine Am I being forced to use systemd now? topic. Locked.

- John
_________________
This space intentionally left blank.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Other Things Gentoo All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

 
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