Debian is what it is, if you don't love it anymore, just move on. And remember that Debian is a DISTRIBUTION!
Debian doesn't make code, apps, programs.
They get what's there and package it.
The choice was made not to invest precious resources in fighting the "systemd doom" and whether you like it or not, the status quo is this, either systemd or whatever else with a few systemd dependencies, as a price to get all the software you want, which is systemd dependent because their upstream developers decided so, not Debian.
I think that the essence of a system without systemd is pretty much still intact and any whining about the "purity" of a system that absolutely can't have a few dependencies that do nothing, well, speaks for itself in telling what is really important for the anti-systemd fanatics. (hint: making a fuss.)
Just so you know, because maybe you didn't read my posts in several past discussion on the matter, I am not a systemd fan, even if I have been using it ever since it entered Testing a long time ago, being a Gnome user (another "sin" I suppose).
I am neutral, mostly because I don't know better and the only reason I chime in in threads like this is because I am fed up with people of the anti-systemd brigade spreading FUD and playing name-calling games in every thread and showing, for the most part, paranoia and a clear lack of understanding of the situation, pushing on in their blind faith driven crusade.
Systemd is here and is here to stay. Hopefully projects like Devuan will offer an alternative for users seeking "purity", or maybe in the end you guys will realize that option 2 is fair enough so do yourself a favor: just run the freaking system with sysvinit and a few systemd libs and get over it
oswaldkelso wrote:I think installing a system without systemd on Debian is hard work and any whining about systemd installing only a few non essential dependancys is naive at best and stupid at worst. dependencies that do nothing, don't need to be installed do they. (Not making a fuss, just pointing out the obvious.)
Believe it or not I am (was) here for a solution - as you are here not to give an answer, but just to rant and insult others.mor wrote:No, you are not here to find a solution.PAP wrote:Anyway, I am not here to start a pointless flame war, but to find a solution
Totally agree, it is what it is - just let me add it's "a systemd-infected distribution". And I am not happy saying that.mor wrote:Debian is what it is, if you don't love it anymore, just move on. And remember that Debian is a DISTRIBUTION!
Complete nonsense. Debian does NOT do just that.mor wrote:Debian doesn't make code, apps, programs.
They get what's there and package it.
They did? Really? All of them? How do you know, if I may ask? And how Slackware, Salix, and others, come with the same software, yet no trace of systemd whatsoever? But I forgot, you are not here to help, you are here to shout nonsense without even the slightest argument.mor wrote:the status quo is this, either systemd or whatever else with a few systemd dependencies, as a price to get all the software you want, which is systemd dependent because their upstream developers decided so, not Debian.
The important thing is not being anti-systemd (which I certainly am, for a reason). The really important thing is the LIBERTY of CHOICE; I capitalized it in a futile attempt to make you understand. I would be perfectly ok if systemd was in Debian, even if it was the default, BUT I also had the choice NOT to use that sh!t whatsoever. How hard is to get that point, I wonder...mor wrote:I think that the essence of a system without systemd is pretty much still intact and any whining about the "purity" of a system that absolutely can't have a few dependencies that do nothing, well, speaks for itself in telling what is really important for the anti-systemd fanatics. (hint: making a fuss.)
Oh sure, not a systemd fan, yet willing to write long posts defending it and insulting others who happen not to have the same opinion. As for your "sin", let me tell you, there would be a sin (and not your sin) if you were NOT able to do what you do, even if what you basically do is (1) having a systemd-infested OS (monolithic "init", with binary logs, extremely invasive), and (2) running one of the worst resource-devourers ever (aka "Gnome"). I would never let my system being like that, but guess what, I would never insult you because you do it - in total contrast with your behavior.mor wrote:I am not a systemd fan, even if I have been using it ever since it entered Testing a long time ago, being a Gnome user (another "sin" I suppose).
Ah yes, it is here to stay. Another one saying that and being all happy about it. I could add more about that, ironic and insulting stuff you certainly love to use yourself. But guess what, I am not like you, and I won't do it. I do "myself a favor", as you put it, but it's not what you recommended. I won't digest the new Debian reality.mor wrote:Systemd is here and is here to stay. Hopefully projects like Devuan will offer an alternative for users seeking "purity", or maybe in the end you guys will realize that option 2 is fair enough so do yourself a favor: just run the freaking system with sysvinit and a few systemd libs and get over it.
I am in the long wait to install Devuan as that is only my present hope. When I succeed to install Devuan on my system, partition /dev/sda8 is patiently waiting for it to be filled
mor wrote:
I also think transitional/dummy packages are stupid and metapackages are pretty much just for idiots.
I think that having to install half of KDE to get me something like Amarok or Marble is pure insanity: oh if only there was some kde-shim!
PAP wrote: Slackware since yesterday; the packaging system is far from being comparable to the excellent Debian package manager
PAP wrote:I will probably end up with Salix or Slackware, but if anyone has another completely systemd-free distro to recommend, I'll be glad to hear and try it.
mardybear wrote:...
Could you please then modify your signature. Nobody should need to love metapackages. That's a big part of this lock-in issue. IMO Linux is supposed to be modular. Why should a Desktop Environment dictate which music player or network manager you want to install or remove? In a few years, unless you use Gnome and systemd (you use both) Linux will become much more difficult for others to utilize how they wish (freedom of choice).
...
confuseling wrote:You do understand that metapackages a) don't actually directly do anything, and b) are beneficial for those wanting modularity, since they allow people to install things *en bloc*, and the only other sane way to do that would be to put them in single giant package?
golinux wrote:*En bloc* tends to overkill. And with the meta package, it becomes difficult to clean out the cruft you don't want. Better to install a base system and then just install the apps you actually want.
AdrianTM wrote:There's no hacker in my grandma...
dilberts_left_nut wrote:golinux wrote:*En bloc* tends to overkill. And with the meta package, it becomes difficult to clean out the cruft you don't want. Better to install a base system and then just install the apps you actually want.
How is it "difficult" to remove a metapackage and mark what you want to keep?
golinux wrote:Why not just mark what you want to install in the first place. It reminds me of having to install systemd then having to uninstall it to install sysvinit. Useless extra hoop to jump through,
AdrianTM wrote:There's no hacker in my grandma...
dzz wrote:I am in the long wait to install Devuan as that is only my present hope. When I succeed to install Devuan on my system, partition /dev/sda8 is patiently waiting for it to be filled
No need to wait. Devuan's debootstrap works. Read mailing list for further details.
confuseling wrote:
You do understand that metapackages a) don't actually directly do anything, and b) are beneficial for those wanting modularity, since they allow people to install things *en bloc*, and the only other sane way to do that would be to put them in single giant package?
golinux wrote:
Better to install a base system and then just install the apps you actually want...
Why not just mark what you want to install in the first place. It reminds me of having to install systemd then having to uninstall it to install sysvinit. Useless extra hoop to jump through,
dilberts_left_nut wrote:
Presumably because not everybody knows (or cares) exactly which packages are required to work together to provide a given set of functions.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests