Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
It's been a while since we had a systemd rant, so...
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

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


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 1551

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 8:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ulenrich wrote:
@khayyam I just answered this question:
MustrumR wrote:
[Why should OpenRC be considered more important than systemd?

with
ulenrich wrote:
Gentoo is a Meta distribution. As systemd takes advantages of special Linux features it is incapable to be used with a BSD kernel. This might change as in the past Bsd has implemented hal for example (just to learn Hal was superceeded by udev).

ulenrich ... well, the connection between the question and response is tentative at best so its not obvious that this was the intention. I say "tentative" as MustrumR's question was specificaly on the inclusion of "openrc files with packages" and why sytstemd should be any different in that regard. So, your "answer", as is generally the case, is off on some tangent.

ulenrich wrote:
Sooo
khayyam wrote:
ulenrich ... again, an argument is structured like so: proposition => conclusion.

I might have forgotten the obvious conclusion: Yes, openrc is needed ....

No, your also missing the "proposition", as the "conclusion" is lacking the connection between the premises involved: Q. "gentoo developers install openrc files with packages, why should systemd be any different in that regard?" A. "gentoo is a meta distribution, systemd takes advantages of special Linux features it is incapable to be used with a BSD kernel [..] this might change". Not only does the conclusion not follow from the premise, but there is no connection between the "question" and your responce to that question. That is why I continue to describe your method of "discussion" as an echo chamber, your off on some tangent having a discussion with yourself.

ulenrich wrote:
You will not educate me to your formula, because I see a forum thread as a whole piece of art with allowed incompleteness of my own text alone. But I should have done a citation of MustrumR, because you and others have been too busy in the time I edited the answer ....

Yes, it seems your completely impervious to "education", unforunately this hasn't stoped you from throwing in your opinions on various subjects as and when it suites you. I assume that any "formula" (like the connection between the beginning of a statement and its conclusion) shouldn't stand in the way of your artistry.

As for "I see a forum thread as a whole piece of art with allowed incompleteness of my own text alone" ... what utter nonsense.

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


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 1551

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

et al ...

Having given this some thought, and coming to the conclusion that the current policy (or lack thereof) is incoherent the following is my current view of how the "systemd issue" should be handled:

1. remove systemd entirely from gentoo
2. replace systemd-udev with "udev-standalone" (or forking udev-171)
3. remove any package that adopts systemd as a "blessed dependency".

That may seem a rather brutal proposal, but the intention is to be consistant, to have a policy on the issue and to abandon the pretense that systemd can co-exist with "choice".

The current policy, I think, amounts to no more than the frog being slow cooked, with the "envitable" only being realised once its too late to track another course.

While I hold out little hope that the above would have any chance of being taken seriously, or less, acted on, such is the impass I think we have been brought to, and the hotter the water the more inclined I am to abandon GNU/systemd-linux.

best ... khay
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MustrumR
n00b
n00b


Joined: 15 Nov 2011
Posts: 45
Location: Right here

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

khayyam wrote:

3. remove any package that adopts systemd as a "blessed dependency".

People like GNOME. I use GNOME 3 on my touchscreen device.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khayyam
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 1551

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MustrumR wrote:
khayyam wrote:
3. remove any package that adopts systemd as a "blessed dependency".

People like GNOME. I use GNOME 3 on my touchscreen device.

MustrumR ... and your point is?

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


Joined: 08 Mar 2005
Posts: 7403
Location: Somewhere over Atlanta, Georgia

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Now, now. It's fairly easy to conclude that he meant, "People like Gnome3, and therefore your position that Gnome 3—because it depends on systemd—should be removed from Portage is an unreasonable one." Don't be the troll.

- John
_________________
This space intentionally left blank.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khayyam
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 1551

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

John R. Graham wrote:
Now, now. It's fairly easy to conclude that he meant, "People like Gnome3, and therefore your position that Gnome 3—because it depends on systemd—should be removed from Portage is an unreasonable one."

John ... whatever was ment, and however many people "like gnome3", why should it be supported. If gnome3 depends on an a specific init how is *this* reasonable? So, there are any number of GNU/systemd-linux to satisfy these "people", why should gentoo necessarily provide this ... other than for reasons that some vague group of persons "like" it?

John R. Graham wrote:
Don't be the troll.

ditto ... khay
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gusar
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 09 Apr 2005
Posts: 2633
Location: Slovenia

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 4:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

khayyam wrote:
why should gentoo necessarily provide this ... other than for reasons that some vague group of persons "like" it?

Let me turn that around on you: Why should Gentoo not package Gnome 3, other than some vague group of persons not liking systemd?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
szczerb
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 1634
Location: Poland => Lodz

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 4:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gusar wrote:
khayyam wrote:
why should gentoo necessarily provide this ... other than for reasons that some vague group of persons "like" it?

Let me turn that around on you: Why should Gentoo not package Gnome 3, other than some vague group of persons not liking systemd?


That actually seems pretty easy.

Systemd let's you use any other DE or none, while Gnome 3 forces a system init mechanism on you. :roll:

EDIT: And no, I don't wanna make systemd look good, but Gnome is clearly the enabler in this pathological relationship.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Yamakuzure
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 21 Jun 2006
Posts: 1238
Location: Bardowick, Germany

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The world ends on 12/21/2012? Yes, because systemd takes over! HA! Dependency of everything ... now ... that'll clean up the portage tree, right? :twisted:

Back to the topic, I do not (fully) understand all this rants against systemd, because they (most of the time) are just rants against Lennart Poettering, whom the ranters (mostly) do not even know. He had some ideas, his ideas got widely adopted, and people where not able to provide something better. So what?

However, I do like the idea of simplifying and unifying things. This is the (basic) idea that made modern DEs for example. Does anybody remember the initial call to develop the "[K]ool [D]esktop [E]nvironment"? Yes, it was basically the idea to put things together that (mostly) belong together to make life easier for pretty much everyone.

Now, before you rip my head off, I do not use SystemD and do not want to use it. That is mainly because I do not believe that SystemD is this simple and unified under the hood (yet). And another reason is, of course, that sysvinit+openrc works perfectly well on all my systems.

There are always ideas and projects that look brilliant and get evolved and spread but eventually outgrow their own purpose. HAL is such an example. It was a great idea, but dead for the better of it since it outgrew its own purpose.
Or take PulseAudio. AFAIR it was meant to be a sound server that can be used as a drop-in replacement for ESD (or OSS or whatever), rerouting sound streams through itself. But then "some" distributions made it the default sound system although it wasn't meant for a pure desktop ALSA-replacement in the first place.

Currently SystemD looks like some sort of "package bundle" with a few daemons. But this might evolve in a real alternative. Or maybe not. Nobody knows for sure.

This is FOSS. If you do not like the path a project takes, fork it.
_________________
I *do* know that I easily aggravate people due to my condensed writing. Rule of thumb: If I wrote anything that can be understood in two different ways, and one way offends you, then I meant the other! ;)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gusar
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 09 Apr 2005
Posts: 2633
Location: Slovenia

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

szczerb wrote:
Systemd let's you use any other DE or none, while Gnome 3 forces a system init mechanism on you.

Yeah. And? That doesn't explain why Gentoo shouldn't package Gnome3.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khayyam
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 1551

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 6:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gusar wrote:
khayyam wrote:
why should gentoo necessarily provide this ... other than for reasons that some vague group of persons "like" it?

Let me turn that around on you: Why should Gentoo not package Gnome 3, other than some vague group of persons not liking systemd?

Gusar ... that isn't a "turn around" because liking systemd, or not, is not really whats at issue, the issue is that with such "blessed dependency" the "choice" of systemd, or not, becomes "systemd (tout court)" as vertical intergration is removing choice from the equation. My rational wrt to the current policy is stated above: abandon the pretense that systemd can co-exist with "choice".

I am in no uncertain terms opposed to systemd on a technical level, but I'm not inclined toward limiting users choices, however, if the method of intergration is such that systemd is required, then my response is that it should be countered and that this intergration should be rejected.

The current policy is such that it is claimed that X and Y can/will co-exist, but as P requires X, then obviously the scales are tipped in favour of X, and with X, P and [:alpha:] all funded and driven by one commercial entity, then the idea that Y, or anything not using X, will happily co-exist is, I think, mistaken.

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


Joined: 09 Apr 2005
Posts: 2633
Location: Slovenia

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 7:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Basically, everything using systemd should be removed. So you're advocating for "choice" by... removing choice.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hcaulfield57
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 142

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 7:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The way I see it, why should Gnome be catered to? They are well aware that the decision to implement systemd as a mandatory dependency is controversial and will limit their userbase. Whether you like Gnome or not, the choice to impose systemd is political and is a bad design decision. Slackware has removed Gnome long ago, and it is likely that the BSDs and Solaris will also be forced to remove it altogether as well.

While khayyam's opinion is controversial, how much more controversial is this compared to the political maneuvering that the systemd people are doing right now? khayyam sees systemd as working its way forcefully into the GNU/Linux ecosystem, and into Gentoo by stealth, he wishes to counteract this.

Also, this is a rant :)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 31365
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 7:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gentoo will remain about choice.

When systemd is a hard requirement of GNOME, emerge gnome will install systemd.
_________________
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
khayyam
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 1551

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 8:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gusar wrote:
Basically, everything using systemd should be removed. So you're advocating for "choice" by... removing choice.

Gusar ... I've already countered such claims ... but ok, you can have your "choice" which *includes* such things as "voluntary servitude", "outcome neutrality", etc, etc.

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


Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 2384

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 8:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have 2 main beefs with systemd :

1 - It (systemd) appears to be turning into a giant glom of a program. Maybe it's not, maybe it's cleanly partitioned into individual components with well-defined functions and interfaces. Maybe it really does follow "The Unix Way". But from 10,000 feet it looks like a piece of slime that crept from Windows over to Linux and is eating its way into the foundation. I'm also willing to accept that my fears in this regard might be baseless - that my 10,000 foot view is incorrect. In that case I'd still say that they have a perception problem, and they would do us all a lot of good to put some work into fixing that.

2 - Again from my 10,000 foot level, systemd appears to be really opaque. This is only partially a repeat of #1, because in this case I'm talking more about using it. In the "good old days" of /etc/X11/xf86config, we ALL had to tamper with the file. It would never "Just Work (TM)". On the other hand with a little work and finding the right point in the documentation, it didn't take that long to learn what you needed to know. As much as people cursed xf86config, it was discoverable. So far, systemd looks to me to be, "Just use it the way we tell you, or get yourself up to developer-level" - there doesn't seem to be a convenient middle-ground.

Perhaps better documentation could fix both of my issues. If I ever get some spare time, maybe THAT could become my contribution.
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gusar
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 09 Apr 2005
Posts: 2633
Location: Slovenia

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 9:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

khayyam wrote:
but ok, you can have your "choice" which *includes* such things as "voluntary servitude", "outcome neutrality", etc, etc.

I'm not using systemd, and I don't intend to in the immediate future. And I never had interest in Gnome, not even the old much saner Gnome2, let alone the crazy thing that is the Gnome Shell. So this "servitude" you're talking about... yeah.

@depontius: Maybe you should step closer than 10,000 feet. When it comes to documentation, there's a series of blog posts and several manpages, describing stuff like targets and how units are written and such. Beyond that, systemd is indeed split into components. The systemd daemon itself starts up services and supervises them. Other stuff is in separate helper modules, and binaries that are usable even with other init systems.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
depontius
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 2384

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 11:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Maybe I do need to get a bit closer, but I had the same feeling when looking at dbus messages and all of the freedesktop.org stuff... It looked to me that to get into it above simply using it, you had to invest a LOT of time and learning. With xf86config I was able to invest just enough to solve one problem at a time - I didn't have to dedicate a lot of learning curve to get past "startx" - just enough to get my mouse recognized, then get the wheel recognized, etc.
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khayyam
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 1551

PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2012 3:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gusar wrote:
khayyam wrote:
but ok, you can have your "choice" which *includes* such things as "voluntary servitude", "outcome neutrality", etc, etc.

I'm not using systemd, and I don't intend to in the immediate future. And I never had interest in Gnome, not even the old much saner Gnome2, let alone the crazy thing that is the Gnome Shell. So this "servitude" you're talking about... yeah.

Gusar ... I'm responding specificly to "you're advocating for "choice" by... removing choice", so your misreading this. My point is not "systemd/gnome" equals "servitude" but that "choice" has a context (that would necessarily exclude certain options).

To provide an example, "choice" is limited by the exclusion/removal of (broken, vunerable, unmaintainable) packages, this happens on a continual basis, should users have the "choice" to install such packages and does their exclusion/removal, or its advocacy, constitute the removal of "choice"?

best ... khay
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hcaulfield57
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 142

PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2012 5:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Honestly, the Gnome developers are the ones here who are severely limiting user choice here by only targeting one init system on one OS. Yes, users have the ability to chose Gnome, but Gnome itself is incompatible with the standard notion of choice within the FOSS ecosystem. One of the strengths of GNU/Linux (and UNIX in general) is that most portions of the userland are modular in nature and are replaceable with other pieces of alternate software if so desired, giving a great amount of choice to the user. This ends when everyone is locked into the systemd/udev/Gnome idea of what a userland should be.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Doctor
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Jul 2010
Posts: 1266

PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2012 5:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

hcaulfield57 wrote:
This ends when everyone is locked into the systemd/udev/Gnome idea of what a userland should be.


Which is a big problem if their vision is wrong. Say, for example, on a server.
_________________
First things first, but not necessarily in that order.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gusar
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 09 Apr 2005
Posts: 2633
Location: Slovenia

PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2012 9:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

khayyam wrote:
To provide an example, "choice" is limited by the exclusion/removal of (broken, vunerable, unmaintainable) packages, should users have the "choice" to install such packages and does their exclusion/removal, or its advocacy, constitute the removal of "choice"?

Wait, are you arguing that systemd and Gnome are broken/vulnerable/unmaintainable? That's ridiculous. They work. They can be used. Even on Gentoo.

khayyam wrote:
My point is [...] that "choice" has a context

A context that does not apply to the software discussed here. So the point of making your point is... zero, pretty much. You're arguing for the sake of arguing. To use John's words: Don't be the troll.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khayyam
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 1551

PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2012 12:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gusar wrote:
Wait, are you arguing that systemd and Gnome are broken/vulnerable/unmaintainable? That's ridiculous. They work. They can be used. Even on Gentoo.

Gusar ... again, I'm responding to "you're advocating for "choice" by... removing choice", so please don't move the goal posts.

Gusar wrote:
khayyam wrote:
My point is [...] that "choice" has a context

A context that does not apply to the software discussed here. So the point of making your point is... zero, pretty much. You're arguing for the sake of arguing. To use John's words: Don't be the troll.

Again, your moving the goal posts, as I was arguing *specifically* against your charge that I am "advocating for "choice" by... removing choice" then the "context" for my statement is clear and applicable. So, before you start calling troll, and making assumptions about my reasons, agruments, etc, you should extend the curtesy of following what I've said, not what you think I've said.

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


Joined: 09 Apr 2005
Posts: 2633
Location: Slovenia

PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2012 1:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

khayyam wrote:
Gusar ... again, I'm responding to "you're advocating for "choice" by... removing choice", so please don't move the goal posts.

This thread is about systemd. So how exactly am I moving goal posts? All my statements were always in connection to systemd (and Gnome). Cos, you know, it's what the thread is about. Are you trying to say you took a statement of mine and responded to it completely disregarding the context in which that statement was made? Sorry, that makes no sense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
szczerb
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 1634
Location: Poland => Lodz

PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2012 1:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gusar wrote:
szczerb wrote:
Systemd let's you use any other DE or none, while Gnome 3 forces a system init mechanism on you.

Yeah. And? That doesn't explain why Gentoo shouldn't package Gnome3.
Just pointed out that your "turning around" made less sense then the original.
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 Gentoo Chat All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 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