Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
The Politics of systemd Part 3
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 10, 11, 12  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Gentoo Chat
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 39299
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 4:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Merged the above 4 posts here.
_________________
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
tld
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Posts: 1222

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 11:33 pm    Post subject: Re: Yep, still not using systemd... Reply with quote

The_Great_Sephiroth wrote:
OK, so I thought I'd read up on systemd and whether I should try Debian 9.
My company delivers our product currently on a CentOS 6 VM. For several reasons (among them the kernel CIFS file system support being limited to SMB1) we're going to need to move to something newer...sooner than later. No possible way are we going to anywhere CentOS 7 or anything with systemd. That mess has no place in Linux, let alone anywhere near anything that calls itself a "server".

We're starting to look into Devuan, seeing as Debian always had a good rep as a solid server OS. I love how that was forked by the Veteran Unix Admins collective.

Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CasperVector
n00b
n00b


Joined: 03 Apr 2012
Posts: 39

PostPosted: Wed Nov 22, 2017 1:22 am    Post subject: Re: Yep, still not using systemd... Reply with quote

tld wrote:
We're starting to look into Devuan, seeing as Debian always had a good rep as a solid server OS.

You can also consider Alpine Linux.
_________________
My current OpenPGP key:
RSA4096/0x227E8CAAB7AA186C (expires: 2020.10.19)
7077 7781 B859 5166 AE07 0286 227E 8CAA B7AA 186C
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Doctor
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 27 Jul 2010
Posts: 2338

PostPosted: Wed Nov 22, 2017 4:26 am    Post subject: Re: Yep, still not using systemd... Reply with quote

tld wrote:
The_Great_Sephiroth wrote:
OK, so I thought I'd read up on systemd and whether I should try Debian 9.
My company delivers our product currently on a CentOS 6 VM. For several reasons (among them the kernel CIFS file system support being limited to SMB1) we're going to need to move to something newer...sooner than later. No possible way are we going to anywhere CentOS 7 or anything with systemd. That mess has no place in Linux, let alone anywhere near anything that calls itself a "server".
Love how Linux's target audience is giving Red Hat the finger over systemd. Almost like the messed something up and telling users to love it doesn't work :lol:
_________________
First things first, but not necessarily in that order.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tld
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Posts: 1222

PostPosted: Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:50 pm    Post subject: Re: Yep, still not using systemd... Reply with quote

The Doctor wrote:
Love how Linux's target audience is giving Red Hat the finger over systemd. Almost like the messed something up and telling users to love it doesn't work :lol:
Yea...systemd and "enterprise server" is about the biggest oxymoron I can think of.

I spent most of last week building a new VM for our product as I mentioned above based on Devuan 1.0, and I can't say enough about it. Kudos to the Devuan folks for sure. I think it'll work out perfectly for us. I'd never even touched Debian in the past and all in all I had no problems getting everything working as we need. The initial VM with the packages we needed installed (basically a headless LAMP system) was a total of 1.2 GB. Every step of the way setting that up re-confirmed everything I already knew. That is, just how important the tried and true Unix philosophies (that everyone's hell bent on destroying) are. Real Linux lives...too cool.

Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sembiance
n00b
n00b


Joined: 03 Oct 2003
Posts: 14
Location: Asheville, NC, USA

PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have this file on my system:

Code:
#/etc/portage/package.mask/poettering

# Mask everything from Lennart Poettering
net-dns/avahi
sys-auth/nss-mdns
media-sound/pulseaudio
sys-apps/ifplugd
net-analyzer/ifmetric
dev-libs/libdaemon
media-sound/pavumeter
net-libs/libasyncns
net-p2p/syrep
sys-auth/nss-myhostname
sys-auth/pam_dotfile
www-apache/mod_dnssd


That way I can avoid Lennart's "forced contributions" entirely. I love Gentoo! :)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krinn
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 5969

PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sembiance wrote:
That way I can avoid Lennart's "forced contributions" entirely. I love Gentoo! :)

Not entirely, udev is also from him, and eudev too then.
And even you don't use his tools, you are still plague by them.
This mask help remove stupidity introduce by the God of code (because openrc now use modules-load.d and if anyone drop a file in it, openrc will load the modules without been ask by you!).
Code:
INSTALL_MASK="/usr/lib/systemd /etc/systemd /lib/systemd /usr/lib/modules-load.d"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmpogo
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 02 Sep 2004
Posts: 2395
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

krinn wrote:
Sembiance wrote:
That way I can avoid Lennart's "forced contributions" entirely. I love Gentoo! :)

Not entirely, udev is also from him, and eudev too then.
And even you don't use his tools, you are still plague by them.
This mask help remove stupidity introduce by the God of code (because openrc now use modules-load.d and if anyone drop a file in it, openrc will load the modules without been ask by you!).
Code:
INSTALL_MASK="/usr/lib/systemd /etc/systemd /lib/systemd /usr/lib/modules-load.d"


wow, /usr/lib/modules-load.d is crazy, I missed that. (And could not understand why my virtualbox are loaded without me asking for it)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tony0945
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 25 Jul 2006
Posts: 2038
Location: Illinois, USA

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 1:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

dmpogo wrote:
wow, /usr/lib/modules-load.d is crazy, I missed that. (And could not understand why my virtualbox are loaded without me asking for it)


Code:
 # locate virtualbox.conf
/usr/lib64/modules-load.d/virtualbox.conf
/usr/portage/app-emulation/virtualbox-modules/files/virtualbox.conf


So, where should virtualbox.conf be?

EDIT: I see! virtualbox.conf is NOT a configuration file. Damn that man! (And I use the term loosely)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 39299
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 9:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sembiance,

Add udev in there ...

/etc/portage/package.mask/:
# an over my dead body hard mask
# dump GNOME and anything else that has this as a hard dependency at any version
sys-apps/systemd

# go back to a static /dev
sys-fs/eudev
sys-fs/udev

sys-auth/polkit
sys-auth/consolekit
media-sound/pulseaudio

# depends on  udev
#>=sys-apps/usbutils-008
#>=sys-apps/hwids-20150107


and we don't want any accidents with USE flags.
/etc/portage/profile/use.mask:
# No automatic hand holding
consolekit
policykit
 
pulseaudio

# Can't use systemd with a static dev as it forces udev
systemd

# Can't use udev with a static dev.
udev

_________________
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
proteusx
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Posts: 150

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 2:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dmpogo wrote:

wow, /usr/lib/modules-load.d is crazy, I missed that. (And could not understand why my virtualbox are loaded without me asking for it)


Damn!
I never noticed it either.
Why on Earth have they done that?
I thought the only way to load modules is through /etc/conf.d/modules

From the virtualbox-modules-5.1.30.ebuild:
Code:
src_install() {
   linux-mod_src_install
   insinto /usr/lib/modules-load.d/
   doins "${FILESDIR}"/virtualbox.conf
}

pkg_postinst() {
   linux-mod_pkg_postinst
   elog "If you are using sys-apps/openrc, please add \"vboxdrv\", \"vboxnetflt\","
   elog "\"vboxnetadp\" and \"vboxpci\" to:"
   elog "  /etc/conf.d/modules"
}

It seems that all this time I was loading the modules twice.
Is someone taking the piss?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5079
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 3:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

proteusx wrote:
dmpogo wrote:

wow, /usr/lib/modules-load.d is crazy, I missed that. (And could not understand why my virtualbox are loaded without me asking for it)


Damn!
I never noticed it either.
Why on Earth have they done that?
I thought the only way to load modules is through /etc/conf.d/modules

From the virtualbox-modules-5.1.30.ebuild:
Code:
src_install() {
   linux-mod_src_install
   insinto /usr/lib/modules-load.d/
   doins "${FILESDIR}"/virtualbox.conf
}

pkg_postinst() {
   linux-mod_pkg_postinst
   elog "If you are using sys-apps/openrc, please add \"vboxdrv\", \"vboxnetflt\","
   elog "\"vboxnetadp\" and \"vboxpci\" to:"
   elog "  /etc/conf.d/modules"
}

It seems that all this time I was loading the modules twice.
Is someone taking the piss?


I missed that as well. foo.d/ makes sense though rather than having one file you could have one file, many or a million. I have a .bash.d and split out alias and others ( ~/.bash.d/alias ~/.bash.d/fn etc...). What isn't good is silent injections. it would have been better if etc-update covered this so the end-user can see and accept.
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krinn
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 5969

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 4:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Have a read there: https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-1066742.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
proteusx
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Posts: 150

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 4:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naib wrote:

foo.d/ makes sense though rather than having one file you could have one file, many or a million. I have a .bash.d and split out alias and others ( ~/.bash.d/alias ~/.bash.d/fn etc...). What isn't good is silent injections. it would have been better if etc-update covered this so the end-user can see and accept.

Let's have /etc/conf.d/modules.d then, as you say, please no sneakiness or surprises.

I have my own script to load modules and start services (samba, cupsd,...) before I start VirtualBox.
This surreptitious loading of modules could cause problems.

P.S.
This is caused by openrc's /etc/init.d/modules that 'wants' modules-load.

Code:
depend()
{
   use isapnp
   want modules-load
   keyword -docker -lxc -openvz -prefix -systemd-nspawn -vserver
}


And /etc/init.d/modules-load says:
Code:
description="Loads a list of modules from systemd-compatible locations."

My blood boils with anger.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tony0945
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 25 Jul 2006
Posts: 2038
Location: Illinois, USA

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 5:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

proteusx,

This is why I run openrc-0.17 from my own local "oldgentoo" overlay. When I find a package that "needs" a higher version, I carefully examine the build and distfile to see if it really does need it. Haven't found one yet.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmpogo
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 02 Sep 2004
Posts: 2395
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 5:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naib wrote:

I missed that as well. foo.d/ makes sense though rather than having one file you could have one file, many or a million. I have a .bash.d and split out alias and others ( ~/.bash.d/alias ~/.bash.d/fn etc...). What isn't good is silent injections. it would have been better if etc-update covered this so the end-user can see and accept.


.d is fine, after all we still have old venerable /etc/modprobe.d :) And as you said, it is silent injections from hidden locations which are wrong. And having to search for confugraitons in /usr/lib ...
And those people talk about security ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 39299
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

proteusx,

What Tony0945 said and some odd design decisions in later versions, some of which have been reverted too.
_________________
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
proteusx
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Posts: 150

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 8:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tony0945 wrote:

This is why I run openrc-0.17 from my own local "oldgentoo" overlay. When I find a package that "needs" a higher version, I carefully examine the build and distfile to see if it really does need it. Haven't found one yet.

I followed your example and got openrc-0.17 from the Attic
Code:
~ # etcat -v openrc
*  sys-apps/openrc :
        [  I] 0.17 (0) [my-overlays]
        [M  ] 0.28 (0)
        [M  ] 0.32.1 (0)
        [M  ] 0.34.11 (0)
        [M  ] 9999 (0)

Everything works fine, bar a slight problem with lm_sensors but I will sort it out.
Thanks for the tip.

P.S. It is regrettable that openrc is now polluted with the systemd deviancy.
I bet that the maintainers of virtualbox are unaware of the surreptitious automatic
loading of their modules. How else can one explain the dumb postinst message advising
to add the modules to /etc/conf.d/modules? Should we file a bug report?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 39299
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 9:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

proteusx,

Add the modules needed by lm-senors to /etc/conf.d/modules in the time honoured manner, or build them into the kernel, so you don't need any modules for lm-sensors.
Now you can remove the version dependency on openrc in the lm-sensors ebuild.

Feel free to file a bug report.
_________________
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
Fitzcarraldo
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 30 Aug 2008
Posts: 1337
Location: United Kingdom

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 9:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

proteusx wrote:
dmpogo wrote:

wow, /usr/lib/modules-load.d is crazy, I missed that. (And could not understand why my virtualbox are loaded without me asking for it)


Damn!
I never noticed it either.
Why on Earth have they done that?
I thought the only way to load modules is through /etc/conf.d/modules

From the virtualbox-modules-5.1.30.ebuild:
Code:
src_install() {
   linux-mod_src_install
   insinto /usr/lib/modules-load.d/
   doins "${FILESDIR}"/virtualbox.conf
}

pkg_postinst() {
   linux-mod_pkg_postinst
   elog "If you are using sys-apps/openrc, please add \"vboxdrv\", \"vboxnetflt\","
   elog "\"vboxnetadp\" and \"vboxpci\" to:"
   elog "  /etc/conf.d/modules"
}

It seems that all this time I was loading the modules twice.
Is someone taking the piss?

I'm another one who missed this. Was there a News item about it? Does the OS actually attempt to load the VirtualBox modules twice as a result of this new file /usr/lib/modules-load.d/virtualbox.conf?
_________________
Clevo W230SS: amd64, OpenRC, nvidia-drivers & xf86-video-intel.
Compal NBLB2: ~amd64, OpenRC, xf86-video-ati, dual booting with Win 7 Pro 64-bit.
KDE on both laptops.

Fitzcarraldo's blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5079
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 10:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fitzcarraldo wrote:
proteusx wrote:
dmpogo wrote:

wow, /usr/lib/modules-load.d is crazy, I missed that. (And could not understand why my virtualbox are loaded without me asking for it)


Damn!
I never noticed it either.
Why on Earth have they done that?
I thought the only way to load modules is through /etc/conf.d/modules

From the virtualbox-modules-5.1.30.ebuild:
Code:
src_install() {
   linux-mod_src_install
   insinto /usr/lib/modules-load.d/
   doins "${FILESDIR}"/virtualbox.conf
}

pkg_postinst() {
   linux-mod_pkg_postinst
   elog "If you are using sys-apps/openrc, please add \"vboxdrv\", \"vboxnetflt\","
   elog "\"vboxnetadp\" and \"vboxpci\" to:"
   elog "  /etc/conf.d/modules"
}

It seems that all this time I was loading the modules twice.
Is someone taking the piss?

I'm another one who missed this. Was there a News item about it? Does the OS actually attempt to load the VirtualBox modules twice as a result of this new file /usr/lib/modules-load.d/virtualbox.conf?


yes and closed presumably as "notABug...
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fitzcarraldo
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 30 Aug 2008
Posts: 1337
Location: United Kingdom

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 11:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

:roll: Messy, or what?
_________________
Clevo W230SS: amd64, OpenRC, nvidia-drivers & xf86-video-intel.
Compal NBLB2: ~amd64, OpenRC, xf86-video-ati, dual booting with Win 7 Pro 64-bit.
KDE on both laptops.

Fitzcarraldo's blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
proteusx
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Posts: 150

PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 12:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

NeddySeagoon wrote:
Add the modules needed by lm-senors to /etc/conf.d/modules in the time honoured manner, or build them into the kernel, so you don't need any modules for lm-sensors.
Now you can remove the version dependency on openrc in the lm-sensors ebuild.

lm_sensors are already built-in the kernel so I removed, as you suggested ,
the openrc dependency from the ebuild.
Thank you.
NeddySeagoon wrote:
Feel free to file a bug report.

From Naib's post it appears that the problem has already been reported
and the response was this irrelevancy:
Quote:
Make an empty /etc/modules-load.d/virtualbox.conf, or symlink that path to /dev/null
Marvelous!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jonathan183
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 13 Dec 2011
Posts: 271

PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 1:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I still currently use openrc version 0.13.11 because it was the oldest version in the tree in January 2016 when I spotted changes in openrc which looked wrong to me ... see this thread. I'm using mdev but have eudev - I think because I required it for building virtualbox ... looks like it may be some time before I use the latest version of openrc :roll:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Shamus397
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 03 Apr 2005
Posts: 213
Location: Ur-th

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2017 3:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Recently, in my travels through the net, I chanced upon a conversation with a person of the 'SystemD has won, get over it' type. What was new here was a bit of revisionist history:
Some random SystemD supporter wrote:
Many major OSes all agreed that systemd was the correct way to proceed, and the ONLY viable init system to use for the future, following years of massive debate between the competing senior developers representing each major distro.

Now I was taken aback a bit by this bald assertion (which my conversant could in no way back up, other than to descend into name calling), but it seems to me this is a new phase in the evolution of the political rhetoric of the SystemD camp that I'm seeing here, where SystemD proponents are actively rewriting history.

The only way to counter this kind of disinformation is to document what really happened.

So in building a timeline of the SystemD phenomenon, here is my understanding of it (and please correct me if any part of it is wrong; also adding years to these events would be very helpful):

  • SystemD makes its first appearance in Red Hat (as Poettering is a Red Hat employee)
  • SystemD then is adopted by Fedora
  • Somewhere around this time, CentOS is embraced by Red Hat, and SystemD is subsequently found there
  • Arch developers adopt SystemD, and are hostile towards anyone who questions their decision

Up to this point, SystemD doesn't really have much traction because it is limited in scope to mainly Red Hat based distros. So someone (or someones) decide to cast their net wider:

  • SystemD enters Gentoo as an alternative to the default OpenRC
  • A phony debate (very similar to the ones involved in Microsoft and their bid to make OOXML an ISO standard) ensues in Debian, with SystemD declared to the only viable long term solution (the video on this page explains what really happened there very well)

So at this point, SystemD has garnered most Linux distros as many are based upon Debian. As far as I can see, there was no 'Meeting of the Distro Minds' that happened here; it's a pretty straightforward case of hostile takeover on a one-by-one basis.

So am I mistaken about this? It seems to me such a internecine distro 'Meeting of the Linux Aristocracy' would have been big news, and widely reported; in all my study of the SystemD phenomenon I have never encountered any such record of such a meeting, not even a fleeting mention. Do any exist?

It could well be that my interlocutor was of the mistaken impression that he was informed on the subject, when he clearly wasn't. The account given by Lord Chesterfield of his attempts to reform the calender in England is likely instructive, as the tactics he used on the House of Lords is eerily similar to the methods employed by the SystemD cabal:
Lord Chesterfield, in 1751 wrote:
It was notorious, that the Julian Calendar was erroneous, and had overcharged the solar year with eleven days. Pope Gregory the Thirteenth corrected this error [in 1582]; his reformed calendar was immediately received by all the Catholic powers of Europe, and afterwards adopted by all the Protestant ones, except Russia, Sweden, and England. It was not, in my opinion, very honourable for England to remain in a gross and avowed error, especially in such company; the inconveniency of it was likewise felt by all those who had foreign correspondences, whether political or mercantile. I determined, therefore, to attempt the reformation; I consulted the best lawyers, and the most skillful astronomers, and we cooked up a bill for that purpose. But then my difficulty began; I was to bring in this bill, which was necessarily composed of law jargon and astronomical calculations, to both of which I am an utter stranger. However, it was absolutely necessary to make the House of Lords think that I knew something of the matter; and also to make them believe that they knew something of it themselves, which they do not. For my own part, I could just as soon have talked Celtic or Sclavonian to them, as astronomy, and they would have understood me full as well; so I resolved to do better than speak to the purpose, and to please instead of informing them. I gave them, therefore, only an historical account of calendars, from the Egyptian down to the Gregorian, amusing them now and then with little episodes; but I was particularly attentive to the choice of my words, to the harmony and roundness of my periods, to my elocution, to my action. This succeeded, and ever will succeed; they thought I informed them, because I pleased them; and many of them said I had made the whole very clear to them; when, God knows, I had not even attempted it.
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 ... , 10, 11, 12  Next
Page 11 of 12

 
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