crowding out bsd using systemd?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
30 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

crowding out bsd using systemd?

frank ernest
Hello, I'm ballsystemlord from the Opensuse forums and I've been reading
a lot about how systemd is unportable, even for use with some linux
programs and the systemd devs are not concerned about it. I, as a single
person, can't possibly hope to maintain the old sysVinit system and also
systemd is a dameon controlling process, not restricted to only boot. A
usr of bsd showed up
http://forums.opensuse.org/showthread.php/498290-systemd/page4 mentioning
that bsd is being crowded out, a thought that had not crossed my mind. I
wanted to know, before assuming that it is the case everywhere, do people
really not like systemd and is it really hurting bsd? If so, I'd be
interested in doing something about it. Thanks, David

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: crowding out bsd using systemd?

Kenneth R Westerback-2
On 28 June 2014 13:55, frank ernest <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello, I'm ballsystemlord from the Opensuse forums and I've been reading
> a lot about how systemd is unportable, even for use with some linux
> programs and the systemd devs are not concerned about it. I, as a single
> person, can't possibly hope to maintain the old sysVinit system and also
> systemd is a dameon controlling process, not restricted to only boot. A
> usr of bsd showed up
> http://forums.opensuse.org/showthread.php/498290-systemd/page4 mentioning
> that bsd is being crowded out, a thought that had not crossed my mind. I
> wanted to know, before assuming that it is the case everywhere, do people
> really not like systemd and is it really hurting bsd? If so, I'd be
> interested in doing something about it. Thanks, David
>

Yep, people really do not like systemd. Leaving aside the problem that
it seems to be so Linux-centric it is impossible to port elsewhere.

Note that OpenBSD has never used sysVinit or variants. We have a much
simpler system that works well as long as the software being
controlled is well written.

That said there is a GSOC project underway as we type to bring a much
slimmed down systemd look-alike functionality to OpenBSD to allow more
not-well written software to be ported.

.... Ken

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: crowding out bsd using systemd?

ian kremlin
> that bsd is being crowded out, a thought that had not crossed my mind.
> I wanted to know, before assuming that it is the case everywhere, do
> people really not like systemd and is it really hurting bsd? If so,
> I'd be interested in doing something about it. Thanks, David

yes, systemd has become a very polarizing subject due to its
unportability (as it's written in pure C) and the mindset and actions of
its authors. it is much, much more than an init daemon and while its
prevalence has served to hurt other systems in the short-term, I
guarantee you will we work around it and do systemd's job properly and
safely just as (we) have done with other software in the past. i am not
a long-term OpenBSD contributor and am admittedly a fledgling
programmer, but from what I've witnessed much of the
systemd/anti-systemd debate is rife with needless animosity and ego.

> That said there is a GSOC project underway as we type to bring a much
> slimmed down systemd look-alike functionality to OpenBSD to allow more
> not-well written software to be ported.

that's me :)
soon, (by the end of gsoc) we will have perfect implementations of
hostnamed, localed, and timedated as well as a framework for porting the
logind behemoth. you can follow the progress at
https://uglyman.kremlin.cc/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?p=systemd-utl.git

ian

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: crowding out bsd using systemd?

Stuart Henderson
In reply to this post by Kenneth R Westerback-2
On 2014-06-28, Kenneth Westerback <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 28 June 2014 13:55, frank ernest <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Hello, I'm ballsystemlord from the Opensuse forums and I've been reading
>> a lot about how systemd is unportable, even for use with some linux
>> programs and the systemd devs are not concerned about it. I, as a single
>> person, can't possibly hope to maintain the old sysVinit system and also
>> systemd is a dameon controlling process, not restricted to only boot. A
>> usr of bsd showed up
>> http://forums.opensuse.org/showthread.php/498290-systemd/page4 mentioning
>> that bsd is being crowded out, a thought that had not crossed my mind. I
>> wanted to know, before assuming that it is the case everywhere, do people
>> really not like systemd and is it really hurting bsd? If so, I'd be
>> interested in doing something about it. Thanks, David
>>
>
> Yep, people really do not like systemd.

Even a significant number of Linux users I've talked to about it really
don't like systemd.

Just looking at the pid 1 part and ignoring the rest, there are way too
many tentacles (library dependencies on SELinux, TCP Wrappers, dbus, PAM!)...

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: crowding out bsd using systemd?

Franco Fichtner-2
In reply to this post by frank ernest
On 28 Jun 2014, at 19:55, frank ernest <[hidden email]> wrote:

> wanted to know, before assuming that it is the case everywhere, do people
> really not like systemd and is it really hurting bsd? If so, I'd be
> interested in doing something about it. Thanks, David

A fact is that systemd slowly tears the open source world apart.
Whether that is a bad thing for BSD or a bad thing for Linux is
something that only time will tell.  There is no sign of decline
in BSD activity, both development and usage, as far as I can tell.

Another fact is that systemd is driven by a large cooperation
and aimed for maximum coverage, which has been mostly achieved.
Whether the framework has a skynet-esque future ahead of it is
something that remains to be seen as well.  With all the `tentacles'
mentioned by Stuart, that is not a far-fetched, yet still daring,
possibility.

Finally, systemd is written by remarkable people who more often
than not fail to address the constructive criticism they have
been facing.  Their lack for the other side will keep them from
making systemd something that is worthwhile for all of today's
modern operating systems if such a feat can indeed be achieved.

I'm not so sure.

If we are in such dire need of an init system replacement, why
has there not been widespread frenzy as with schedulers, package
managers, packet filters, programming languages and so forth?


Cheers,
Franco

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: crowding out bsd using systemd?

Giancarlo Razzolini-3
In reply to this post by Stuart Henderson
Em 28-06-2014 20:39, Stuart Henderson escreveu:
> Even a significant number of Linux users I've talked to about it really
> don't like systemd.
Hate it. Made all my linux based systems slower.
>
> Just looking at the pid 1 part and ignoring the rest, there are way too
> many tentacles (library dependencies on SELinux, TCP Wrappers, dbus, PAM!)...
Tentacles? This is a ls of the src dir of systemd:

ac-power
activate
analyze
ask-password
backlight
binfmt
boot
bootchart
bus-proxyd
cgls
cgroups-agent
cgtop
compat-libs
core
cryptsetup
dbus1-generator
delta
detect-virt
efi-boot-generator
fsck
fstab-generator
getty-generator
gpt-auto-generator
gudev
hostname
initctl
journal
kernel-install
libsystemd
libsystemd-network
libudev
locale
login
machine
machine-id-setup
Makefile
modules-load
network
notify
nspawn
nss-myhostname
python-systemd
quotacheck
random-seed
rc-local-generator
readahead
remount-fs
reply-password
rfkill
run
shared
shutdownd
sleep
socket-proxy
sysctl
systemctl
systemd
system-update-generator
test
timedate
tmpfiles
tty-ask-password-agent
udev
update-utmp
vconsole

    This design goes against anything Unix. Instead of doing a specific
thing well, they try to do all things and many of them half ass. If
someone take a look at the recent discussion with Linus and one of the
systemd developers, which ultimately ended with Linus removing commit
access from the developer, one can see where systemd is headed.

Cheers,

--
Giancarlo Razzolini
GPG: 4096R/77B981BC

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: crowding out bsd using systemd?

Henning Brauer
In reply to this post by ian kremlin
* ian kremlin <[hidden email]> [2014-06-29 01:05]:
> due to its unportability (as it's written in pure C)

that doesn't make the slightest sense.

"pure C" can be and often is perfectly portable.

--
Henning Brauer, [hidden email], [hidden email]
BS Web Services GmbH, http://bsws.de, Full-Service ISP
Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS. Virtual & Dedicated Servers, Root to Fully Managed
Henning Brauer Consulting, http://henningbrauer.com/

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: crowding out bsd using systemd?

patrick keshishian
On 6/28/14, Henning Brauer <[hidden email]> wrote:
> * ian kremlin <[hidden email]> [2014-06-29 01:05]:
>> due to its unportability (as it's written in pure C)
>
> that doesn't make the slightest sense.
>
> "pure C" can be and often is perfectly portable.

i took it as sarcasim.

--patrick

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: crowding out bsd using systemd?

ian kremlin
In reply to this post by Henning Brauer
> that doesn't make the slightest sense.
>
> "pure C" can be and often is perfectly portable.

those were not the right words, i meant to convey that because systemd
uses its own DBus binding (and not an already-ported lib like
GIO/GDbus) it would be difficult to port, as that binding is seemingly
very specific to systemd and doesn't expose (or guarantee the
reliability of) existing generic APIs. that, plus how complex and
specific  the low level DBus API is makes it much more painstaking and
unnecessary. it would end up looking more like a fork than anything.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: crowding out bsd using systemd?

Daniel Cegiełka
In reply to this post by ian kremlin
2014-06-29 1:05 GMT+02:00 ian kremlin <[hidden email]>:

>> that bsd is being crowded out, a thought that had not crossed my mind.
>> I wanted to know, before assuming that it is the case everywhere, do
>> people really not like systemd and is it really hurting bsd? If so,
>> I'd be interested in doing something about it. Thanks, David
>
> yes, systemd has become a very polarizing subject due to its
> unportability (as it's written in pure C) and the mindset and actions of
> its authors. it is much, much more than an init daemon and while its
> prevalence has served to hurt other systems in the short-term, I
> guarantee you will we work around it and do systemd's job properly and
> safely just as (we) have done with other software in the past. i am not
> a long-term OpenBSD contributor and am admittedly a fledgling
> programmer, but from what I've witnessed much of the
> systemd/anti-systemd debate is rife with needless animosity and ego.

systemd is very invasive and destroys all that different. That's why
people are angry.

http://ewontfix.com/14/
http://ewontfix.com/15/

by Rich Felker (musl libc).


>> That said there is a GSOC project underway as we type to bring a much
>> slimmed down systemd look-alike functionality to OpenBSD to allow more
>> not-well written software to be ported.
>
> that's me :)
> soon, (by the end of gsoc) we will have perfect implementations of

https://uglyman.kremlin.cc/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?p=systemd-utl.git;a=blob;f=scripts/gen-gdbus-interfaces.sh;h=f827434d0211ea8765c075fdb2916386ffc16ecb;hb=HEAD

btw. it's bashism in a posix shell suit?

Daniel

> hostnamed, localed, and timedated as well as a framework for porting the
> logind behemoth. you can follow the progress at
> https://uglyman.kremlin.cc/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?p=systemd-utl.git
>
> ian

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: crowding out bsd using systemd?

Antoine Jacoutot-7
> https://uglyman.kremlin.cc/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?p=systemd-utl.git;a=blob;f=scripts/gen-gdbus-interfaces.sh;h=f827434d0211ea8765c075fdb2916386ffc16ecb;hb=HEAD
>
> btw. it's bashism in a posix shell suit?

If that is all you were able to spot then move along :-)
It's very pre-alpha WIP and many things will be modified. If you have real helpful comments to make, feel free to contact Ian, landry@ and myself.

--
Antoine

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: crowding out bsd using systemd?

Barbier, Jason
In reply to this post by Franco Fichtner-2
 >If we are in such dire need of an init system replacement, why has
there not been widespread frenzy as >with schedulers, package managers,
packet filters, programming languages and so forth?

Maybe because people don't seem to think the same thing, or feel the
urgency to replace it. But a decent replacement always starts with one
person with a good idea that can take criticism and play well with others,

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: crowding out bsd using systemd?

Eric Furman-3
In reply to this post by Antoine Jacoutot-7
My real helpful comments are that it violates every real concept of UNIX
Do ONE thing and do it WELL
Systemd does none of these things.

On Sun, Jun 29, 2014, at 04:51 AM, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:

> > https://uglyman.kremlin.cc/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?p=systemd-utl.git;a=blob;f=scripts/gen-gdbus-interfaces.sh;h=f827434d0211ea8765c075fdb2916386ffc16ecb;hb=HEAD
> >
> > btw. it's bashism in a posix shell suit?
>
> If that is all you were able to spot then move along :-)
> It's very pre-alpha WIP and many things will be modified. If you have
> real helpful comments to make, feel free to contact Ian, landry@ and
> myself.
>
> --
> Antoine

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: crowding out bsd using systemd?

bodie
In reply to this post by frank ernest
On 29.06.2014 12:40, Eric Furman wrote:
> My real helpful comments are that it violates every real concept of
> UNIX
> Do ONE thing and do it WELL

It's because RedHat (and Oracle) doesn't care about Unix principles (or
initial ideas of Linux). They are stating it quite clearly and yet
people and communities can't see that. Especially RedHat does not care
about Linux or Unix as such. It's company, they want to make profit and
create form of vendor lock in. That's how sharks operate in that
territory. Thinking that they will listen to any one be it some
community leader or some big distribution is at least naive. Look at
ArchLinux, Ubuntu, Fedora, OpenSuSe, Debian, Gentoo and others. It's
either shut up and play with us or leave "Linux" game nowadays. And
because most of the development is done anyway in RedHat and/or Oracle
they either need to follow or dissapear. So here's that true freedom
hidden in GPL. Following orders of one/two big corporations and that's
it. BSD world had crash with corporate world in 90's in USL vs BSDi and
BSD won, but seems like corporations found another way how to cripple
Unix roots to its knees.

Think about why Linus is so much in rage mood this year against various
devs from RedHat and yet can do shit about them because he's no longer
in control and he knows it. No wonder he choose to focus more on on-line
Linux courses under Linuxfoundation (he will not have so much time for
kernel during those for sure).


> Systemd does none of these things.
>
> On Sun, Jun 29, 2014, at 04:51 AM, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
>> >
>> https://uglyman.kremlin.cc/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?p=systemd-utl.git;a=blob;f=scripts/gen-gdbus-interfaces.sh;h=f827434d0211ea8765c075fdb2916386ffc16ecb;hb=HEAD
>> >
>> > btw. it's bashism in a posix shell suit?
>>
>> If that is all you were able to spot then move along :-)
>> It's very pre-alpha WIP and many things will be modified. If you
>> have
>> real helpful comments to make, feel free to contact Ian, landry@ and
>> myself.
>>
>> --
>> Antoine

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: crowding out bsd using systemd?

Gustav Fransson Nyvell
On 06/29/14 13:09, bodie wrote:

> On 29.06.2014 12:40, Eric Furman wrote:
>> My real helpful comments are that it violates every real concept of UNIX
>> Do ONE thing and do it WELL
>
> It's because RedHat (and Oracle) doesn't care about Unix principles
> (or initial ideas of Linux). They are stating it quite clearly and yet
> people and communities can't see that. Especially RedHat does not care
> about Linux or Unix as such. It's company, they want to make profit
> and create form of vendor lock in. That's how sharks operate in that
> territory. Thinking that they will listen to any one be it some
> community leader or some big distribution is at least naive. Look at
> ArchLinux, Ubuntu, Fedora, OpenSuSe, Debian, Gentoo and others. It's
> either shut up and play with us or leave "Linux" game nowadays. And
> because most of the development is done anyway in RedHat and/or Oracle
> they either need to follow or dissapear. So here's that true freedom
> hidden in GPL. Following orders of one/two big corporations and that's
> it. BSD world had crash with corporate world in 90's in USL vs BSDi
> and BSD won, but seems like corporations found another way how to
> cripple Unix roots to its knees.
>
> Think about why Linus is so much in rage mood this year against
> various devs from RedHat and yet can do shit about them because he's
> no longer in control and he knows it. No wonder he choose to focus
> more on on-line Linux courses under Linuxfoundation (he will not have
> so much time for kernel during those for sure).
>
>
>> Systemd does none of these things.
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 29, 2014, at 04:51 AM, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
>>> >
>>> https://uglyman.kremlin.cc/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?p=systemd-utl.git;a=blob;f=scripts/gen-gdbus-interfaces.sh;h=f827434d0211ea8765c075fdb2916386ffc16ecb;hb=HEAD
>>> >
>>> > btw. it's bashism in a posix shell suit?
>>>
>>> If that is all you were able to spot then move along :-)
>>> It's very pre-alpha WIP and many things will be modified. If you have
>>> real helpful comments to make, feel free to contact Ian, landry@ and
>>> myself.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Antoine
>
UNIX is very old. Some hang on to one or two principles like they're the
word of god. For example, in this discussion, that one tool should do
one thing and do it well. It kind of makes you blind. Look at the bigger
picture. Isn't systemd doing one thing and doing it well? Sure, it's
opaque, I guess. Do you miss configuring by file? I do, I think it's
reliable. Maybe systemd needs a bit of KISS criticism, because it sure
isn't looking simple. At the end of the day, all we need is a running
system, we don't need... dbus. However, like I started this, the word of
god gets in the way, there are a lot of convenient things going on in
Linux (or Ubuntu, I used Ubuntu.) This is where you hate me but I like
the kernel or system to use the entire computer for the task I am doing,
but I am mainly a "desktop" user or non-server user, at least on the
home laptop. When I compile, I want ALL resources working towards it. If
I watch a movie, ALL resources towards it. The machine's focus should be
on what I want to do. And... well, this is where UNIX gets in the way. I
think we could develop UNIX, just look at Plan 9. There are some great
ideas in there. Which have been implemented too. Everything as a file,
is a very good idea. It's very simple. UNIX does not have this idea in
it. But I think like Theo de Raadt wrote, "I don't know what they are
chasing" about the corporations, Red Hat et al. It's not the finer
points of computer discoveries they're after. Plan 9 isn't a huge
commercial success, but it's fine. Well, just my two cents!

--
This e-mail is confidential and may not be shared with anyone other than recipient(s) without written permission from sender. Public domain through misc@

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: crowding out bsd using systemd?

Antoine Jacoutot-7
In reply to this post by frank ernest
So first you comment on Ian's GSoC and now on systemd... thai is confusing. I don't care about systemd we will never have  it. We just need some interfaces that are currently only implemented  in systemd.

 Eric Furman <[hidden email]> wrote:

>My real helpful comments are that it violates every real concept of UNIX
>Do ONE thing and do it WELL
>Systemd does none of these things.
>
>On Sun, Jun 29, 2014, at 04:51 AM, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
>> > https://uglyman.kremlin.cc/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?p=systemd-utl.git;a=blob;f=scripts/gen-gdbus-interfaces.sh;h=f827434d0211ea8765c075fdb2916386ffc16ecb;hb=HEAD
>> >
>> > btw. it's bashism in a posix shell suit?
>>
>> If that is all you were able to spot then move along :-)
>> It's very pre-alpha WIP and many things will be modified. If you have
>> real helpful comments to make, feel free to contact Ian, landry@ and
>> myself.
>>
>> --
>> Antoine

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: crowding out bsd using systemd?

Antoine Jacoutot-7
In reply to this post by frank ernest
Why are people poluting our lists with systemd rants??? There is nothing to discuss since we do not want and will never have systemd. If you don't understand what the systemd-utl GSoC is about then move along.

 Gustav Fransson Nyvell <[hidden email]> wrote:

>On 06/29/14 13:09, bodie wrote:
>> On 29.06.2014 12:40, Eric Furman wrote:
>>> My real helpful comments are that it violates every real concept of UNIX
>>> Do ONE thing and do it WELL
>>
>> It's because RedHat (and Oracle) doesn't care about Unix principles
>> (or initial ideas of Linux). They are stating it quite clearly and yet
>> people and communities can't see that. Especially RedHat does not care
>> about Linux or Unix as such. It's company, they want to make profit
>> and create form of vendor lock in. That's how sharks operate in that
>> territory. Thinking that they will listen to any one be it some
>> community leader or some big distribution is at least naive. Look at
>> ArchLinux, Ubuntu, Fedora, OpenSuSe, Debian, Gentoo and others. It's
>> either shut up and play with us or leave "Linux" game nowadays. And
>> because most of the development is done anyway in RedHat and/or Oracle
>> they either need to follow or dissapear. So here's that true freedom
>> hidden in GPL. Following orders of one/two big corporations and that's
>> it. BSD world had crash with corporate world in 90's in USL vs BSDi
>> and BSD won, but seems like corporations found another way how to
>> cripple Unix roots to its knees.
>>
>> Think about why Linus is so much in rage mood this year against
>> various devs from RedHat and yet can do shit about them because he's
>> no longer in control and he knows it. No wonder he choose to focus
>> more on on-line Linux courses under Linuxfoundation (he will not have
>> so much time for kernel during those for sure).
>>
>>
>>> Systemd does none of these things.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 29, 2014, at 04:51 AM, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> https://uglyman.kremlin.cc/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?p=systemd-utl.git;a=blob;f=scripts/gen-gdbus-interfaces.sh;h=f827434d0211ea8765c075fdb2916386ffc16ecb;hb=HEAD
>>>> >
>>>> > btw. it's bashism in a posix shell suit?
>>>>
>>>> If that is all you were able to spot then move along :-)
>>>> It's very pre-alpha WIP and many things will be modified. If you have
>>>> real helpful comments to make, feel free to contact Ian, landry@ and
>>>> myself.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Antoine
>>
>UNIX is very old. Some hang on to one or two principles like they're the
>word of god. For example, in this discussion, that one tool should do
>one thing and do it well. It kind of makes you blind. Look at the bigger
>picture. Isn't systemd doing one thing and doing it well? Sure, it's
>opaque, I guess. Do you miss configuring by file? I do, I think it's
>reliable. Maybe systemd needs a bit of KISS criticism, because it sure
>isn't looking simple. At the end of the day, all we need is a running
>system, we don't need... dbus. However, like I started this, the word of
>god gets in the way, there are a lot of convenient things going on in
>Linux (or Ubuntu, I used Ubuntu.) This is where you hate me but I like
>the kernel or system to use the entire computer for the task I am doing,
>but I am mainly a "desktop" user or non-server user, at least on the
>home laptop. When I compile, I want ALL resources working towards it. If
>I watch a movie, ALL resources towards it. The machine's focus should be
>on what I want to do. And... well, this is where UNIX gets in the way. I
>think we could develop UNIX, just look at Plan 9. There are some great
>ideas in there. Which have been implemented too. Everything as a file,
>is a very good idea. It's very simple. UNIX does not have this idea in
>it. But I think like Theo de Raadt wrote, "I don't know what they are
>chasing" about the corporations, Red Hat et al. It's not the finer
>points of computer discoveries they're after. Plan 9 isn't a huge
>commercial success, but it's fine. Well, just my two cents!
>
>--
>This e-mail is confidential and may not be shared with anyone other than recipient(s) without written permission from sender. Public domain through misc@

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: crowding out bsd using systemd?

Franco Fichtner-2
On 29 Jun 2014, at 13:43, Antoine Jacoutot <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Why are people poluting our lists with systemd rants??? There is nothing to discuss since we do not want and will never have systemd. If you don't understand what the systemd-utl GSoC is about then move along.

First of all, this is misc@.  And, secondly, whenever different
opinions meet there is potential to learn and improve.  Thank you
for your understanding.


Cheers,
Franco

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: crowding out bsd using systemd?

Gustav Fransson Nyvell
In reply to this post by Antoine Jacoutot-7
On 06/29/14 13:43, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:

> Why are people poluting our lists with systemd rants??? There is nothing to discuss since we do not want and will never have systemd. If you don't understand what the systemd-utl GSoC is about then move along.
>
>   Gustav Fransson Nyvell <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On 06/29/14 13:09, bodie wrote:
>>> On 29.06.2014 12:40, Eric Furman wrote:
>>>> My real helpful comments are that it violates every real concept of UNIX
>>>> Do ONE thing and do it WELL
>>> It's because RedHat (and Oracle) doesn't care about Unix principles
>>> (or initial ideas of Linux). They are stating it quite clearly and yet
>>> people and communities can't see that. Especially RedHat does not care
>>> about Linux or Unix as such. It's company, they want to make profit
>>> and create form of vendor lock in. That's how sharks operate in that
>>> territory. Thinking that they will listen to any one be it some
>>> community leader or some big distribution is at least naive. Look at
>>> ArchLinux, Ubuntu, Fedora, OpenSuSe, Debian, Gentoo and others. It's
>>> either shut up and play with us or leave "Linux" game nowadays. And
>>> because most of the development is done anyway in RedHat and/or Oracle
>>> they either need to follow or dissapear. So here's that true freedom
>>> hidden in GPL. Following orders of one/two big corporations and that's
>>> it. BSD world had crash with corporate world in 90's in USL vs BSDi
>>> and BSD won, but seems like corporations found another way how to
>>> cripple Unix roots to its knees.
>>>
>>> Think about why Linus is so much in rage mood this year against
>>> various devs from RedHat and yet can do shit about them because he's
>>> no longer in control and he knows it. No wonder he choose to focus
>>> more on on-line Linux courses under Linuxfoundation (he will not have
>>> so much time for kernel during those for sure).
>>>
>>>
>>>> Systemd does none of these things.
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jun 29, 2014, at 04:51 AM, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
>>>>> https://uglyman.kremlin.cc/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?p=systemd-utl.git;a=blob;f=scripts/gen-gdbus-interfaces.sh;h=f827434d0211ea8765c075fdb2916386ffc16ecb;hb=HEAD
>>>>>> btw. it's bashism in a posix shell suit?
>>>>> If that is all you were able to spot then move along :-)
>>>>> It's very pre-alpha WIP and many things will be modified. If you have
>>>>> real helpful comments to make, feel free to contact Ian, landry@ and
>>>>> myself.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Antoine
>> UNIX is very old. Some hang on to one or two principles like they're the
>> word of god. For example, in this discussion, that one tool should do
>> one thing and do it well. It kind of makes you blind. Look at the bigger
>> picture. Isn't systemd doing one thing and doing it well? Sure, it's
>> opaque, I guess. Do you miss configuring by file? I do, I think it's
>> reliable. Maybe systemd needs a bit of KISS criticism, because it sure
>> isn't looking simple. At the end of the day, all we need is a running
>> system, we don't need... dbus. However, like I started this, the word of
>> god gets in the way, there are a lot of convenient things going on in
>> Linux (or Ubuntu, I used Ubuntu.) This is where you hate me but I like
>> the kernel or system to use the entire computer for the task I am doing,
>> but I am mainly a "desktop" user or non-server user, at least on the
>> home laptop. When I compile, I want ALL resources working towards it. If
>> I watch a movie, ALL resources towards it. The machine's focus should be
>> on what I want to do. And... well, this is where UNIX gets in the way. I
>> think we could develop UNIX, just look at Plan 9. There are some great
>> ideas in there. Which have been implemented too. Everything as a file,
>> is a very good idea. It's very simple. UNIX does not have this idea in
>> it. But I think like Theo de Raadt wrote, "I don't know what they are
>> chasing" about the corporations, Red Hat et al. It's not the finer
>> points of computer discoveries they're after. Plan 9 isn't a huge
>> commercial success, but it's fine. Well, just my two cents!
>>
>> --
>> This e-mail is confidential and may not be shared with anyone other than recipient(s) without written permission from sender. Public domain through misc@
>>
I'm not saying GET systemd. I thought this was a broad discussion. And
I'm NOT ranting.

--
This e-mail is confidential and may not be shared with anyone other than recipient(s) without written permission from sender. Public domain thru misc@

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: crowding out bsd using systemd?

Daniel Cegiełka
In reply to this post by Antoine Jacoutot-7
2014-06-29 13:40 GMT+02:00 Antoine Jacoutot <[hidden email]>:
> So first you comment on Ian's GSoC and now on systemd... thai is confusing.
> I don't care about systemd we will never have  it. We just need some interfaces
> that are currently only implemented  in systemd.

This is the right approach to the subject: we need only some
interfaces from systemd. Nothing more.

12