Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Are we losing freedom of choice?
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Other Things Gentoo
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
eyoung100
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 1406

PostPosted: Tue Oct 29, 2013 7:12 pm    Post subject: Are we losing freedom of choice? Reply with quote

saellaven wrote:
eyoung100 wrote:
I don't normally bite on these, but I have to here. Systemd is not being forced upon us. Systemd is being discussed in this matter because Pacho Ramos as a maintainer of GNOME 3.x decided to make systemd mandatory, not because he wanted to but because that is the direction the GNOME Developers chose to take, because most of the GNOME developers use a system where systemd is the default init system.

If you don't want or don't like systemd, use stable gnome 2.x or KDE 4. Just because Gentoo is about choice doesn't mean we wont be asked to adopt or follow new standards. Not being able to adapt to change is what causes these types of arguments. Are we supposed to punish the GNOME developers or resort to name calling like we have here just because they used the same freedom of choice in choosing Ubuntu or Fedora as their development platform :?:


This discussion doesn't belong in this thread.

That said, it isn't about gnome being married to systemd, it's about Gentoo deprecating long existing functionality to placate systemd to please a subset of users.

It's very much about removing choice. That said, if you want to discuss it, I suggest we start a thread outside of this one.


What long standing functionality is being deprecated :?: The fact remains that GNOME3 IS MARRIED to systemd, because the developers of said GNOME voted to make it a requirement. My point was this: Are you and everyone else who will jump on this thread expecting Gentoo as a community to shun GNOME Desktop users because we choose to use SysV init/openrc. If you don't like systemd don't use GNOME, otherwise stop complaining here and complain to the GNOME team.

Pacho's Take, plus last I checked GNOME3 is still marked testing because of this very reason...
_________________
The Birth and Growth of Science is the Death and Atrophy of Art -- Unknown
Registerd Linux User #363735
Adopt a Post | Strip Comments| Emerge Wrapper
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kurly
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 02 Apr 2012
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Tue Oct 29, 2013 7:59 pm    Post subject: Re: Are we losing freedom of choice? Reply with quote

eyoung100 wrote:
. . . plus last I checked GNOME3 is still marked testing because of this very reason...

Not for long... they have other plans. Prepare for massive pain in the forums and IRC, to far exceed that which we've seen to date. Also there is a push underway to purge all previous versions of GNOME shortly after stabilization of 3.8.

It doesn't matter to me yet because I switched to Xfce4 well in advance of this mess. But I lack faith that those in power will defend my choice. I hope I'm wrong, but I'm not as comfortable as I once was.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
saellaven
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 208

PostPosted: Tue Oct 29, 2013 8:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is no need to shun GNOME 3 or systemd. Neither are simply for me.

That said, I don't think there is any need to actually remove existing functionality for all of the users that neither want GNOME 3 nor systemd, particularly when there is a simple workaround that solves the problem without introducing new complications or making our systems more fragile.

In particular, the current functionality officially voted by the Council to be terminated, is the ability to have a separate /usr partition without an initramfs (which is an extra layer of complexity and is prone to unexpected, silent failure). There exists a simple, relatively non-intrusive patch which seamlessly re-enables the functionality. This patch has existed for almost 2 years, was known by williamh - the Council member who requested the termination of a separate /usr, whom is also herd lead of openrc (a fact frequently brought up when it is mentioned that he was behind the request), but also a member of the systemd herd (a fact always conveniently left out), but he neglected to mention said patch to the Council at large and per discussions I've had elsewhere, has refused to include it in openrc.

So, whether we choose to use systemd or not, the constraints of systemd ARE being forced on our systems. In the future, we're likely to see the option to have a separate /var go away (the lead developer of systemd has said it will be supported for now, but may go away if he chooses, just as he removed support for /usr), possibly have the /usrmerge (everything in the root filesystem merged into /usr) - which the Council has currently punted on but have admitted they may revisit in the future, etc.

In short, systemd infects nearly every vector of a system that it is placed on and continues to expand, absorbing more and more core functionality (and even non-core functionality) without any clear bounds of stopping. It enforces a one size fits all mentality that it alone controls nearly every aspect of your system, often in ways that are not only counterintuitive, but contrary to the longstanding *nix principles.

People wishing to use systemd or any of the packages that depend upon it, like GNOME, should be free to do so. However, people that do not want systemd and the baggage that comes with it, should not be forced to have their systems conformed to the restraints systemd places on its users. If Gentoo is about choice, systemd's restrictions are the antithesis of choice, particularly when the Council not only says that packages no longer have to let functionality exist, but util-linux may be leveraged specifically to break our systems if we don't conform to the constraints of systemd even if we aren't using it.

So, by all means, support systemd, but don't intentionally break our systems or force us to jump through previously unecessary hoops if we don't want its baggage. If the lead of openrc doesn't wish to support openrc because he's become enamored with systemd, let someone else maintain it.


Though incomplete, this will be my only post on the matter for a couple days while I cool off after the trolling done in the previous threads over the last few days. I only posted this due to the original thread poster messaging me directly, wishing to jumpstart a discussion. I expect this to be as equally fruitless as the other threads and expect trolling to commence immediately. I'd also like to publicly thank the people that have private messaged me or emailed me off-site supporting my efforts, many of whom have given up on debating the topic because of the trolling by the pro-systemd crowd.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eyoung100
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 1406

PostPosted: Tue Oct 29, 2013 8:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

saellaven wrote:
There is no need to shun GNOME 3 or systemd. Neither are simply for me.
...

In particular, the current functionality officially voted by the Council to be terminated, is the ability to have a separate /usr partition without an initramfs (which is an extra layer of complexity and is prone to unexpected, silent failure). There exists a simple, relatively non-intrusive patch which seamlessly re-enables the functionality. This patch has existed for almost 2 years, was known by williamh - the Council member who requested the termination of a separate /usr, whom is also herd lead of openrc (a fact frequently brought up when it is mentioned that he was behind the request), but also a member of the systemd herd (a fact always conveniently left out), but he neglected to mention said patch to the Council at large and per discussions I've had elsewhere, has refused to include it in openrc.


Code:
eselect news read 7

2013-09-27-initramfs-required, which points one to Booting Without /usr is Broken

saellaven wrote:
In short, systemd infects nearly every vector of a system that it is placed on and continues to expand, absorbing more and more core functionality (and even non-core functionality) without any clear bounds of stopping. It enforces a one size fits all mentality that it alone controls nearly every aspect of your system, often in ways that are not only counterintuitive, but contrary to the longstanding *nix principles.


And I've heard it said that GNOME was created to easily transition users from Windows to *NIX, so following that statement isn't GNOME is making the transition easier for people wishing to try an alternative to Windows, by setting settings behind the scenes that we've become accustomed to setting because Gentoo in itself has always kept config files out in the open?

saellaven wrote:
... but util-linux may be leveraged specifically to break our systems if we don't conform to the constraints of systemd even if we aren't using it.


util-linux used to contain initctl, which initializes the init system, and simpleinit which will boot single user mode, but were removed in 2012. (util-linux) As long as a USE Flag is maintained to tell which init system to use, we shouldn't have a problem. Last I checked we had 3 methods of fixing this, the Gentoo--> Kernel Option, the openrc USE Flag, and the systemd USE Flag

saellaven wrote:
If the lead of openrc doesn't wish to support openrc because he's become enamored with systemd, let someone else maintain it.

Evidenced by this line and a previous paragraph, has williamh stated publicly that he is "enamored" with systemd :?:

Let it be known that I HATE systemd, so bash me if you like, regardless, I'm standing up for the user's CHOICE as to whether they want systemd or not
_________________
The Birth and Growth of Science is the Death and Atrophy of Art -- Unknown
Registerd Linux User #363735
Adopt a Post | Strip Comments| Emerge Wrapper
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
saellaven
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 208

PostPosted: Tue Oct 29, 2013 9:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

eyoung100 wrote:

Code:
eselect news read 7

2013-09-27-initramfs-required, which points one to Booting Without /usr is Broken


The link you posted has been completely debunked at least a half a dozen times here on the forums alone... and at this point, anyone that posts it is just showing their ignorance. It was also williamh's primary justification in removing /usr despite the threads here. At best, the Council has kept themselves wilfully ignorant regarding that screed. Just posting that link makes me want to abandon this thread.

Go read the other threads to see why forcing us to use an initramfs is taking away our choice and making our systems more fragile, why a separate /usr isn't broken, etc...

Quote:

And I've heard it said that GNOME was created to easily transition users from Windows to *NIX, so following that statement isn't GNOME is making the transition easier for people wishing to try an alternative to Windows, by setting settings behind the scenes that we've become accustomed to setting because Gentoo in itself has always kept config files out in the open?


GNOME was created because KDE didn't have a GPL license. And when GNOME was created, it was actually about maximizing choices. That changed in GNOME 2.0, where they started deleting functionality based on the recommendations of UI experts and, in GNOME 3.0 became even more crippled.

If anything, at the time of their creations KDE was the Windows clone, directly copying the look and feel of it. So can we please not revise history to appease contemporary agendas?

Quote:

saellaven wrote:
... but util-linux may be leveraged specifically to break our systems if we don't conform to the constraints of systemd even if we aren't using it.


util-linux contains initctl, which initializes the init system, and simpleinit which will boot single user mode. As long as a USE Flag is maintained to tell which init system to use, we shouldn't have a problem. Last I checked we had 3 methods of fixing this, the Gentoo--> Kernel Option, the openrc USE Flag, and the systemd USE Flag


util-linux contains programs like /bin/mount which need to be available for the system to mount drives, particularly in a repair type situation. AFAIK, the plan is to stop moving those types of programs to their traditional home in /bin and /sbin and into /usr/bin and /usr/sbin, which would intentionally break our systems for no purpose other than to inflict pain in an effort to force us to use an initramfs or give up a separate /usr. How long until /var and other filesystems are treated the same way?

Quote:

saellaven wrote:
If the lead of openrc doesn't wish to support openrc because he's become enamored with systemd, let someone else maintain it.

Evidenced by this line and a previous paragraph, has williamh stated publicly that he is "enamored" with systemd :?:

Let it be known that I HATE systemd, so bash me if you like, regardless, I'm standing up for the user's CHOICE as to whether they want systemd or not


He's the one that asked for the change to intentionally break a separate /usr (something ALWAYS supported on linux prior to systemd) and has refused to accept the patches to openrc to let it continue to work there (which only matters due to systemd absorbing udev, and in turn, breaking udev in the same way systemd is broken). So, if his interest was in maintaining openrc and its functionality, why not accept the patch unless he has become enamored with systemd? Perhaps his intention is to let openrc bitrot until people have to use systemd (but that's pure speculation on my part)?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 31342
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Tue Oct 29, 2013 9:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This sums my take on systemd
/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

but no amount of discussion will change anything - what is needed is code.
_________________
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
saellaven
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 208

PostPosted: Tue Oct 29, 2013 9:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NeddySeagoon wrote:
This sums my take on systemd
/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

but no amount of discussion will change anything - what is needed is code.


The code to fix openrc and udev for a seamless boot on a separate /usr without initramfs has existed for 2 years and the openrc lead knows about it, but fought to get the Council to deprecate a separate /usr for the sake of systemd anyway.

So, masking systemd, which I have done, hasn't prevented systemd from forcing my systems to be unsupported come November 1, at which point, the Council has approved openly making core, non-systemd packages hostile to a long-existing, working configuration.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eyoung100
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 1406

PostPosted: Tue Oct 29, 2013 9:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Would you please link the discussions regarding separate usr etc as I am not trying to be ignorant, and according to the FHS Wiki:

Some Linux distributions no longer differentiate between /bin versus /usr/bin and /sbin versus /usr/sbin. They symlink /bin to /usr/bin and /sbin to /usr/sbin. And /usr/sbin may get symlinked to /usr/bin.

This is the distros choice, and since the developer of systemd, works for Redhat, who chose to follow that standard, he is writing code that inherently contains Redhat specific items, although Myth 28, states that --rootprefix can be used.
_________________
The Birth and Growth of Science is the Death and Atrophy of Art -- Unknown
Registerd Linux User #363735
Adopt a Post | Strip Comments| Emerge Wrapper
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 31342
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Tue Oct 29, 2013 10:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

saellaven,

Systemd is only the tip of the iceberg. The /usr merge is being driven by freedesktop.org, of which systemd is only a part.

Right now, there are several ways to keep a separate /usr working without an initrd.
Nothing will magically stop working on 1st November.

The council vote does two things
[*]Recognises the futility of carrying an ever growing patch set to revert the /usr merge
[*]Allows individual devs to close bugs as CANTFIX or WONTFIX if the cause is a separate /usr and it not being mounted early enough

The /usr merge is only an issue for source based distros. Binary distro users will mostly not notice. They are all accustomed to an initramfs anyway.
_________________
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
Anon-E-moose
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 2083
Location: Dallas area

PostPosted: Tue Oct 29, 2013 10:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

People forget the reasoning for bin vs /usr/bin and sbin vs /usr/sbin.
There is a reason /usr is called what it is.
/bin and /sbin were for system specific software other ie user level software went somewhere under /usr

System specific software doesn't belong under the /usr tree with links back to /bin or /sbin.
If anything it should be the opposite.

It's a poor design to just start throwing everything in one big pile, links or no links.
_________________
Asus m5a99fx, FX 8320 - amd64-multilib, 3.9.1-zen, eudev
glibc-2.17, gcc-4.7.3-r1, xorg-server-1.15, lxde, nouveau, oss4


Last edited by Anon-E-moose on Tue Oct 29, 2013 10:32 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TomWij
Developer
Developer


Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1342

PostPosted: Tue Oct 29, 2013 10:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

saellaven wrote:
In particular, the current functionality officially voted by the Council to be terminated, is the ability to have a separate /usr partition without an initramfs (which is an extra layer of complexity and is prone to unexpected, silent failure). There exists a simple, relatively non-intrusive patch which seamlessly re-enables the functionality. This patch has existed for almost 2 years, was known by williamh - the Council member who requested the termination of a separate /usr, whom is also herd lead of openrc (a fact frequently brought up when it is mentioned that he was behind the request)


I have asked WilliamH to comment on this matter in this thread.

saellaven wrote:
So, whether we choose to use systemd or not, the constraints of systemd ARE being forced on our systems. In the future, we're likely to see the option to have a separate /var go away (the lead developer of systemd has said it will be supported for now, but may go away if he chooses, just as he removed support for /usr),


If this is the upstream developer, that is quite blunt if that is done on purpose; I really wonder about the reasoning behind this, and if an initramfs suddenly starts to become required for everything it may very well be a red herring that there is a problem with the Linux kernel, because really, why should we have an initramfs in the first place? Not that the Linux kernel is bad; but you know, maybe just the viable core of it should be merged into the kernel...

If this is a Gentoo developer, the final decision is with the council; people can say all they want, if the council doesn't vote on it or vote the contrary, it cannot happen.

saellaven wrote:
possibly have the /usrmerge (everything in the root filesystem merged into /usr) - which the Council has currently punted on but have admitted they may revisit in the future, etc.


There are enough people on both sides that I do not see this happen any time soon; whereas no support for a separate /usr without initramfs is a pain for some, merging /usr would be suicide for many.

saellaven wrote:
In short, systemd infects nearly every vector of a system that it is placed on and continues to expand, absorbing more and more core functionality (and even non-core functionality) without any clear bounds of stopping.


Yes and no; if you are talking with regards to the above then I agree with you to some extent, if we are talking about the rest (the ability to use separate services, things that are default but can be disabled, ...) then I refer you to the previous thread we have about that. I'll recapitulate shortly with an example, just to demonstrate that it isn't much that comes along with it and you can just turn those off easily:

Code:
 $ systemctl | grep systemd | grep '\(waiting\|running\|listening\)' | grep -v '\(ask-password\|scket\)' | awk '{ print $1, " - ", $5, $6, $7, $8, $9 }'
systemd-journald.service  -  Journal Service   
systemd-logind.service  -  Login Service   
systemd-udevd.service  -  udev Kernel Device Manager
systemd-tmpfiles-clean.timer  -  Daily Cleanup of Temporary Directories


But yes, OpenRC doesn't come with those enabled; so, from a perspective that you start from the least and build up the system, I can understand how things that are enabled by default can be infectious.

saellaven wrote:
It enforces a one size fits all mentality that it alone controls nearly every aspect of your system, often in ways that are not only counterintuitive, but contrary to the longstanding *nix principles.


The "one size fits all" principle by itself implies that systemd cannot possibly fit everyone, otherwise they'd be the first to void a rule that applies to so much in this world, sounds impossible; while it may very well intend to do so, it'll turn out in a very stretchy pants that will be sloppy to wear.

saellaven wrote:
However, people that do not want systemd and the baggage that comes with it, should not be forced to have their systems conformed to the restraints systemd places on its users. If Gentoo is about choice, systemd's restrictions are the antithesis of choice, particularly when the Council not only says that packages no longer have to let functionality exist, but util-linux may be leveraged specifically to break our systems if we don't conform to the constraints of systemd even if we aren't using it.


That will be a different vote; and if something is forced on purpose, I'm certain that people will speak up against it. In a lot of what I see (eg. GNOME 3.8 making systemd optional) Gentoo has often been supportive into making it possible to go for the unsupported alternative. I hope to not see them do this.

saellaven wrote:
So, by all means, support systemd, but don't intentionally break our systems or force us to jump through previously unecessary hoops if we don't want its baggage. If the lead of openrc doesn't wish to support openrc because he's become enamored with systemd, let someone else maintain it.


I have asked WilliamH to comment on this matter in this thread as well.

saellaven wrote:
Though incomplete, this will be my only post on the matter for a couple days while I cool off after the trolling done in the previous threads over the last few days. I only posted this due to the original thread poster messaging me directly, wishing to jumpstart a discussion. I expect this to be as equally fruitless as the other threads and expect trolling to commence immediately. I'd also like to publicly thank the people that have private messaged me or emailed me off-site supporting my efforts, many of whom have given up on debating the topic because of the trolling by the pro-systemd crowd.


I'm sorry to have not understood what you were trying to achieve with your efforts in the previous thread; that has something to do with the topic, since this thread is more neutral and isn't meant to understand systemd.

eyoung100 wrote:
Evidenced by this line and a previous paragraph, has williamh stated publicly that he is "enamored" with systemd :?:


I have asked WilliamH to comment on this matter in this thread as well.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
olek
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 161

PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 12:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

NeddySeagoon wrote:
This sums my take on systemd
/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

but no amount of discussion will change anything - what is needed is code.


this.
_________________
https://cosmofox.net/gen2
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
v_andal
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 26 Aug 2008
Posts: 283
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 10:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It would be better to ask, did we ever have freedom of choice? Most of us use software created by someone else. So we have to live with the ideas that authors put in their code. No matter how much I'd hate ConsoleKit or PolicyKit, there are many applications that use them.

As NeddySeagoon wrote, "no amount of discussion will change anything - what is needed is code". If there's no working code without systemd, there shall be no choice but use systemd. Gentoo can't change here anything. Gentoo maintainers can't maintain separate versions of all of the software out there. So Gentoo will have to adapt.

The real "freedom of choice" is only in deciding "to upgrade or not to upgrade", everything else is in the hands of upstream developers. So, I believe one shouldn't waste words on persuading developers, instead one should find ways to support the developers that do things "right", or start developing him/herself. IMHO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ulenrich
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 10 Oct 2010
Posts: 1122

PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 11:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Obviously there was some action one year ago. SteveL wasn't ignored in total all the time:
https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7193886.html#7193886
ryao wrote:
steveL, WilliamH wrote the fix. I just posted it for convenience. Anyway, it looks to me like we could merge your modifications into OpenRC if we moved this check into its own script in the sysinit runlevel and made them depend on it.


[edit] I delete my last paragraph, I didn't correctly understand the patch
_________________
fun2gen2


Last edited by ulenrich on Wed Oct 30, 2013 12:02 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rudregues
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 29 Jan 2013
Posts: 188

PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 12:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NeddySeagoon wrote:
This sums my take on systemd
/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

but no amount of discussion will change anything - what is needed is code.

v_andal wrote:
The real "freedom of choice" is only in deciding "to upgrade or not to upgrade", everything else is in the hands of upstream developers. So, I believe one shouldn't waste words on persuading developers, instead one should find ways to support the developers that do things "right", or start developing him/herself. IMHO.


Now that's why I read these forums.
_________________
Emerging en gentoo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrbassie
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 31 May 2013
Posts: 135

PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 12:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sort of on topic, podcast discussion about Debian possibly switching to systemd: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8vw9mKqWg0

I listened to this live last night and after reading through this thread and the now locked systemd one in Gentoo chat, I thought maybe other members may find this interesting/enjoyable.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ulenrich
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 10 Oct 2010
Posts: 1122

PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 3:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd think we should talk about the Link Schorsch gave recently:
https://plus.google.com/115547683951727699051/posts/8RmiAQsW9qf
LP wrote:
People on the email thread have claimed we had an agenda. That's actually certainly true, everybody has one. Ours is to create a good, somewhat unified, integrated operating system. And that's pretty much all that is to our agenda.


The Debian maintainers mainly discuss the steps how to proceed:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.devel.general/187624/
People think Debian will favor Upstart because of the many Debian developers coming from Canonical. But Canonical could come to the other conclusion it could better do the server market supporting Systemd.

I thought it would take a long time until Systemd world domination. But if Debian decides
- in favor of Systemd it is a fast changing Linux world probably ...
- pro Upstart, Debian would have to maintain extra efforts regarding logind, dbus, cgroups
Such Debian efforts could help Gentoo attempts pro choice.

An answer to LP from a Gentoo blog:
http://gentooexperimental.org/~patrick/weblog/archives/2013-10.html#e2013-10-29T13_39_32.txt
_________________
fun2gen2
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
olek
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 161

PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 5:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
It would be better to ask, did we ever have freedom of choice? Most of us use software created by someone else. So we have to live with the ideas that authors put in their code. No matter how much I'd hate ConsoleKit or PolicyKit, there are many applications that use them.


I didn't see such a problem before, and it really doesn't have to be like that. Just do it the unix way - make each program do one thing well.
I do see why mainstream DEs aren't that way, but I don't see why low level programs shoudln't be like that.
My init shall boot my machine. That's all. Since when and why is it of it's concern how I partition my system, or how I'm logging things, or which firewall I'm using? It's ridiculous.

I really wouldn't have any idea why they are doing all this, when not for making others depend on their dicisions, and therefore to sell support.
Why is everyone willing to get all this mess shoved down their throats?

It's obvious that all these other huge distros are adopting, but is there really any other reason for doing so aswell?
Mainstream distros might have their reasons, and their users won't even recognize, it's not of their interest whats really running underneath their dektops.
But Gentoo? Why would anyone who's running a source-based-distro be interested in a "never-touch-or-question-this-monolithic-all-is-fine-as-is-thing"?

And should a distro like Gentoo really accept cutdowns for supporting something, that totally denies freedom of choice for anything? I mean, it's just the beginning. First pulseaudio, then *kit, now *d, next is kicking out linux altogether or completely closing down all their software for alternatives. It will all get more complicated once you follow their path while still trying to make choices possible. What I thought Gentoo was about. I doubt anyone can do both.

As if anyone would accept microsoft or apple driven projects to replace what was perfectly fine before.
_________________
https://cosmofox.net/gen2
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
schorsch_76
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 19 Jun 2012
Posts: 135

PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 5:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@ulenrich: Yes, this post from L.P. needs to be discussed ( in my humble opinion ).

What concerns me most is, that this software is so "land-grabbing".
- logind which gdm-3.8 requires from systemd
- cgroups (resource management)
- init management
- hostname
- syslog
- change to binary logfile format
- udev

It is so orthogonal to the unix principle. A tool should do one thing. L.P. dont want to accept patches that it can support other kernels like BSD. He did break his promise [1] [2] , as he integrated udev into systemd's repo, that udev will always be available as standalone tool, but it is now deprecated (standalone udev).

Yes i understand that sysinitv is quiet old, that the start scripts are a burden to manage, that there might be new approches to start the userland, but in my eyes please do each task seperatly with clear API.

He says that systemd is not monolithic, because it is composed of 69 binaries, but he also says, that for example logind "could not be ripped out of systemd".

From my point of view, it is innovative of course, but the wrong direction. the components should be components and not one complete system which can not be seperated. I know, that i can use syslog-ng, but i need to use his logind, his systemd if i want to use gnome. Margreth Thatcher called that TINA. There is no alternative.

But my opinion is just my opinion and upstream of systemd will not take it serious. Gentoo Devs can not do much, as the upstream will propably not take the opinion of the gentoo devs serious. Will he take the words from the debian devs serious? What needs to happen than he accepts a point from other people? No one can stop him to drop support for other components, say the logger, cron and so on like he did with standalone udev.

Am i just too oldschool to understand that genius?
Is he a genious or just a crazy guy?
Does the "one system for all things" break the unix philosophy or not?
Is that philosophy just outdated?
Can the open source comunity trust him?
Can i trust him?

I dont want to start a flame war, i just wrote down my _personal_ points from that picture of systemd.

Bye schorsch

[1] http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Udev-will-become-part-of-systemd-1500832.html
[2] http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2012-July/006064.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eyoung100
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 1406

PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

olek wrote:
"never-touch-or-question-this-monolithic-all-is-fine-as-is-thing"
.

May I present Myth #6.

In all fairness does Gentoo have users who don't recognize a change :?:
_________________
The Birth and Growth of Science is the Death and Atrophy of Art -- Unknown
Registerd Linux User #363735
Adopt a Post | Strip Comments| Emerge Wrapper
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
olek
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 161

PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 6:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
May I present Myth #6.


http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html

Wow.
Quote:
Myth: systemd is not UNIX.
There's certainly some truth in that. systemd's sources do not contain a single line of code originating from original UNIX.


This whole text is so utterly bogus.

Quote:
Myth: systemd is complex.

There's certainly some truth in that. Modern computers are complex beasts, and the OS running on it will hence have to be complex too.


Quote:
Myth: systemd doesn't support /usr split from the root directory.

Non-sense. Since its beginnings systemd supports the --with-rootprefix= option to its configure script which allows you to tell systemd to neatly split up the stuff needed for early boot and the stuff needed for later on. All this logic is fully present and we keep it up-to-date right there in systemd's build system.


Quote:
A package involving 69 individual binaries can hardly be called monolithic.


What a smartass.
_________________
https://cosmofox.net/gen2
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
depontius
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 2384

PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 6:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

eyoung100 wrote:
olek wrote:
"never-touch-or-question-this-monolithic-all-is-fine-as-is-thing"
.

May I present Myth #6.

In all fairness does Gentoo have users who don't recognize a change :?:


This: "systemd is not casually hackable". (Nor is a lot of stuff from freedesktop.org, for that matter.)

By "casually hackable" I mean that when your system goes south, in an hour or so of web searches and man pages you can figure out how to get it running again. I date back to the days when xf86config files were an art every X11 user had to learn something about, and back when one of the early things you had to do was rebuild your kernel to access the cdrom drive and whatever-the-heck audio you had.

In those days, Linux took a LOT of "casual hacking" to get to a happily usable point. There is progress in that today we get there faster. But we've also lost something, because we've picked up a lot of "Just Works (TM)" stuff, and when that stuff doesn't work it's a bear to "casually hack" your way back to working. For instance, those dbus "magic strings" look obvious once someone gives you the answer, but to get to the right string on your own is another matter.

I'm sure that better, casual hacker level documentation would answer a big part of my objections.
I'll also say this, perhaps systemd is modular, and none of those other similar objections are valid, either. But it doesn't present that image. From this point, it looks big and opaque, no matter what the reality may be. To someone who likes to play with the guts in some spare time (not dedicated developer-type time) the appearance is really bad.

It looks to me like freedesktop.org is striving mightily to turn Linux into Windows. Use the installer, stay in the GUIs, it Just Works (TM), don't ask questions. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
creaker
Guru
Guru


Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 480

PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 6:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It is strange to hear that we still have a choice.
Do we have a choice in reality? At first glance, we can still choose to use systemd or not to use. If I dislike systemd, I can unset appropriate USE flag. It seems fine. With one small caveat: this is only possible because of the structure of the Gentoo, that gives as possibility to select software we like to have installed.
Let's look at it from the other side, regardless Gentoo.
In past I had Arch installed at my box. When Arch completely moved to systemd, I asked at their forum: how can I stay with openrc?
Someone answered me that it is not possible. If I dislike systemd I have a choice: to use Arch with systemd or to pick some other distro.
I removed Arch and stayed with Gentoo.
Last time I see the same things going on Gentoo side. Yes, of course, I still can prepend systemd with "-" sign and get a clear system.
But the thing is that the systemd grows like a cancer throughout the body, paddling for themselves more and more...
And I'm pretty sure that in the near future USE="+systemd" will be declared as hard enabled because of all the universe depends on it.
We already had the same scenario with hard enabled "semantic-desktop".
So right now I have a choice that I have in past with Arch: to prepare myself to use systemd or to move somewhere else. It is a good choice.

All this looks
Like the rat in a maze who says:
"Watch me choose my own direction"

© Rush
_________________
Intel Core i3-2120 / 4Gb RAM / 250Gb HDD / NVidia GeForce-550Ti
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anon-E-moose
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 2083
Location: Dallas area

PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 7:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

schorsch_76 wrote:
He says that systemd is not monolithic, because it is composed of 69 binaries, but he also says, that for example logind "could not be ripped out of systemd".


If one cannot pull out or compile standalone any one binary, then it is monolithic.

This is one of the definitions of monolithic
(of an organization or system) large, powerful, and intractably indivisible and uniform.

Which quite frankly fits what systemd is, no matter how many binaries are produced from it.
_________________
Asus m5a99fx, FX 8320 - amd64-multilib, 3.9.1-zen, eudev
glibc-2.17, gcc-4.7.3-r1, xorg-server-1.15, lxde, nouveau, oss4
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anon-E-moose
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 2083
Location: Dallas area

PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 7:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

eyoung100 wrote:
olek wrote:
"never-touch-or-question-this-monolithic-all-is-fine-as-is-thing"
.

May I present Myth #6.

In all fairness does Gentoo have users who don't recognize a change :?:


Are you trying to be a troll? Edit to add: not saying you are just asking.

Most of us have seen the "myths" before and also know that what he says is more or less, simple fertilizer spreading.
_________________
Asus m5a99fx, FX 8320 - amd64-multilib, 3.9.1-zen, eudev
glibc-2.17, gcc-4.7.3-r1, xorg-server-1.15, lxde, nouveau, oss4
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 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5

 
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