Debian User Forums

keithpeter wrote:

buntunub wrote:I really don't get why people feel the need to post huge unrelated pictures of stupid sh$t in reference to Debians use of Systemd.

Probably meant as light humour. The posting of crude cartoons with captions has been a popular response to unpopular policies since the time of Hogarth in the UK.

Didn't know of Hogarth and such.
Back then, when the new staff was introduced and started to ban users, censor, edit posts and remove posts, each second post contained pointless images, 4-chan-like.
Ain't even close to that, the 5 or 6 pictures which have been posted (and mmx sure didn't post several).

I can't see an important cause.
People getting murdered by a drone (in the end by Obama) is a seriuous cause, in my book.

Besides that everything regarding systemd and the possible solutions has already been said. And it has been said a dozen times.
No need to keep on saying it. Either make the according change or don't, but stay sersious? Of what use might that be?
(as if anyone would care what random people in a random forum have to say).

Let me quote Zappa:

Does humor belong in computing

(nah, he didn't say computing).

--------------
swirler:
if you like have a look at refracta:
http://refracta.freeforums.org/proto-re ... -t440.html
might be they will get it sorted for jessie-stable.

If these links have been posted in this thread already, I apologize in advance (I really didn't want to scour all 9 pages to find out), I just think they might be some good reading on the subject. Make no mistake, I am still very much against poetthatd (virusd, systemd, same thing), and I'll be switching to either Debian kfreebsd or any other non-virusd distro (see this thread courtesy of fruitofloom). iTWire Story about why Debian is dumping the kfreebsd port because of virusd here (but Debian welcomes devs to maintain a non-official port, gee, go figure).

Debian's rationale for using virusd here.

I'll save you the reading if your eyes are sore or you don't like reading long fluffy bologna, my bs decoder ring says "because other lemmings have jumped off the cliff, we're following them, wheeeeeeeee, because we're sheeples like dat".

Linadian wrote:If these links have been posted in this thread already, I apologize in advance (I really didn't want to scour all 9 pages to find out), I just think they might be some good reading on the subject. Make no mistake, I am still very much against poetthatd (virusd, systemd, same thing), and I'll be switching to either Debian kfreebsd or any other non-virusd distro (see this thread courtesy of fruitofloom). iTWire Story about why Debian is dumping the kfreebsd port because of virusd here (but Debian welcomes devs to maintain a non-official port, gee, go figure).

Debian's rationale for using virusd here.

I'll save you the reading if your eyes are sore or you don't like reading long fluffy bologna, my bs decoder ring says "because other lemmings have jumped off the cliff, we're following them, wheeeeeeeee, because we're sheeples like dat".

Nice. Debian is making the move to Systemd preemptively because some people on the board believe that it is the smart thing to do to stay with the trends in the general marketplace, so to speak. What that really means is that there is very strong Corporate influence pulling the strings. Not just for Debian, but for all the major Distros. This is what the money machines want, and Linux provides a damned attractive (read free as in there are no licensing fees; just setup/maintenance costs) for the big moneyed interests. Red Hat is already paving the way and has been for quite a long time now. So there's that. And then there are the silent majority of Linux users who just want a damned free system that works likes Windows. Not in the proprietary sense, but they want something that, "just works". Well, "just works" has a heavy price tag that comes with it. "Just works" means that users don't want to have to think about anything or futz with any command line doohicky. They just want to install their free Linux thingy and be done with it, and then work or play games on it. This is what A LOT of people have been crying crocodile tears about for longer than I have been using Linux.

And so here we are. The future of Linux. There is a definite parallel with trends in the real world as well. It has been said that, "Freedom dies to thundrous applause". I think there is a strong ring of truth to that statement and we are watching it play out right in front of our eyes now.

So, I've been keeping away from this discussion since it has started, but I will just quickly give my impressions
of a newly installed Debian Jessie system with systemd, slim login manager, openbox and a few programmes and scripts.
This is a notebook used as an all-around-desktop machine.
I usually choose stability over fresh packages, meaning that I'd have removed this system if it had even the smallest annoying bugs.

* Things work as they did before (settings, personal bash scripts, etc.)
* I can still do all the command line doohicky as someone here named it
* The programmes aren't faster or slower as on Wheezy, but I appreciate the new versions
* The system boots/shuts down/sleeps/resumes much faster than before
* Fewer bugs than a similar custom set up on Ubuntu 14.04 LTS (!)
* I had to adjust a few scripts that have to do with shutdown/restart/suspend/hibernate
* It's still all open source and DFSG

@buntunub: A couple of remarks...

1) Redhat rather like their licencing fees I think, as do Oracle. The Money Machines have to actually make some money!

2) I *think* it may be possible and technically desirable to deliver a 'just works' desktop or server a) without using abstraction upon abstraction and b) using core components with well defined interfaces that c) will work with other core components of differing versions thus giving distributions freedom to mix and match.

It will probably take a couple of decades for the message to sink in. C'est La Vie.

thanatos_incarnate wrote:....I will just quickly give my impressions
of a newly installed Debian Jessie system with systemd, slim login manager, openbox and a few programmes and scripts.

Same general idea, I use IceWM and don't have Slim, I just use startx and set sudo up so shutdown, pm-suspend and pm-hibernate can be run by user. Similar observations to yourself. I *think* it is agnostic as to init system.

keithpeter wrote: 2) I *think* it may be possible and technically desirable to deliver a 'just works' desktop or server a) without using abstraction upon abstraction and b) using core components with well defined interfaces that c) will work with other core components of differing versions thus giving distributions freedom to mix and match.

Forgive me, I'm still trying to wrap my head around this, but Isn't that the systemd approach?
A unification of things like all those daemons (hal, etc.) into the init system and sending those
calls directly to the kernel which has already evolved into being able to cover all those needs?
And it's also relatively modular, i.e. components can be enabled/disabled at compilation.

thanatos_incarnate wrote:A unification of things like all those daemons (hal, etc.) into the init system and sending those
calls directly to the kernel which has already evolved into being able to cover all those needs?

Philospohical question: If that was the intent of systemd, wouldn't it be frutile 'cause the kernel already provides this functionality?

twoflowers wrote:

thanatos_incarnate wrote:A unification of things like all those daemons (hal, etc.) into the init system and sending those
calls directly to the kernel which has already evolved into being able to cover all those needs?

Philospohical question: If that was the intent of systemd, wouldn't it be frutile 'cause the kernel already provides this functionality?

Can't answer that due to lack of technical knowledge, so I don't think we can resolve that with a purely philosophical argument.

The intent of systemd, to quote its authors, is to provide basic building blocks for an OS. Now, as far as I understood it, systemd provides that, but uses certain kernel features as tools (so maybe my statement that the kernel covers all needs was a wrong choice.)

thanatos_incarnate wrote:So, I've been keeping away from this discussion since it has started, but I will just quickly give my impressions
of a newly installed Debian Jessie system with systemd, slim login manager, openbox and a few programmes and scripts.
This is a notebook used as an all-around-desktop machine.
I usually choose stability over fresh packages, meaning that I'd have removed this system if it had even the smallest annoying bugs.

* Things work as they did before (settings, personal bash scripts, etc.)
* I can still do all the command line doohicky as someone here named it
* The programmes aren't faster or slower as on Wheezy, but I appreciate the new versions
* The system boots/shuts down/sleeps/resumes much faster than before
* Fewer bugs than a similar custom set up on Ubuntu 14.04 LTS (!)
* I had to adjust a few scripts that have to do with shutdown/restart/suspend/hibernate
* It's still all open source and DFSG

Did anyone say anywhere that anything of that would be the problem, or that anything of that would not be the case?
Didn't others already post the very same thing for several times?

fruitofloom wrote: Did anyone say anywhere that anything of that would be the problem, or that anything of that would not be the case?
Didn't others already post the very same thing for several times?

Nope. Yet somehow I can't see what the problem is. All I hear is an alleged takeover of Red Hat that is based on conjecture,
the presumed downfall of the entire Linux ecosystem just because systemd is going against a few UNIX principles and POSIX
compatibility (which from my perspective was never that big between between distros and other *NICES) and a lot of arguments
that start with insults, threats and the like.

I already listed the problems several times.
So did others on this board.
So does the WWW.

If you can't figure out the problem, that is really your problem.

I could just as well repeat that sysv is running fine here, all the time. And of course it does. But that is neither the problem nor the question.

The only sound argument I got from it is the technical one:

"I don't like the way systemd works because of foo, foo bar,... foo*n+1"

Then there are the usual arguments against bugs, but all relatively new software has bugs
and the buggy state is not yet stable in Debian terms.

All other arguments I've seen so far seem either illogical or are based on some conjecture about
a future where systemd has become a monolithic and "de facto proprietary" (for lack of a better word),
or let's say commercial piece of software which prevents open source software freedoms and
free software values to live on.

thanatos_incarnate wrote:Can't answer that due to lack of technical knowledge, so I don't think we can resolve that with a purely philosophical argument.

thanatos_incarnate wrote:The only sound argument I got from it is the technical one:
"I don't like the way systemd works because of foo, foo bar,... foo*n+1"

This might sound rude but I think you missed the point, despite you stateted it yourself: maybe you do not understand the reasons against systemd due to a lack of technical knowledge.

But feel free to keep me in the dark, that way I will surely be convinced of your way.

thanatos_incarnate wrote:

keithpeter wrote: 2) I *think* it may be possible and technically desirable to deliver a 'just works' desktop or server a) without using abstraction upon abstraction and b) using core components with well defined interfaces that c) will work with other core components of differing versions thus giving distributions freedom to mix and match.

Forgive me, I'm still trying to wrap my head around this, but Isn't that the systemd approach?
A unification of things like all those daemons (hal, etc.) into the init system and sending those
calls directly to the kernel which has already evolved into being able to cover all those needs?
And it's also relatively modular, i.e. components can be enabled/disabled at compilation.

The systemd wider project calls for components to be lockstepped in each version and each version in future be tied to a specific version of the kernel. Upgrade one piece, upgrade the lot. My understanding is that the systemd api is also still under rapid development, so interfaces between components changing with each version with little in the way of a roadmap available.

I'm sure it will always work, and work well, within a given version, so Jessie release, and Jessie+N release will always work. May be implications for what you can put in a release though. And when you can make a release. See where that is going? Not intentional, just an inevitable side effect of the architechture.

LOL ... good point
I can just speak for myself: It's a nuicance to get functionality that A provides wrapped in a layer of B and then be told that's cool. It's not, it simply bad design. Same goes for the "debig" kernelcommand. Hijacking functionality is not cool, it's stupid. And from there on a tree of consequences branches, including "breaks unix philosophy", "violates KISS" and probably "tries to cirvumvent GPL" are the easiest.
And "providing buildingblocks for an OS" is the worst of all: I already have an OS, what would i want virusd for? Playing LEGO with my OS?

[removed by fleabus, redundant]

thanatos_incarnate wrote:But feel free to keep me in the dark, that way I will surely be convinced of your way.

Nobody convinced me one way or the other in deciding to fight against Debians decision to foist Systemd on the next stable release. I came to that decision after a long bout of searching the net and reading the Systemd docs, as well as sifting through all the various blogs and forum posts about it on a whole host of websites and Distro specific entries. This is how it works. You have A LOT of reading to catch up on!

In the beginning I was as incrudulous as anyone that a piece of software could get anyone up in arms. Education has taught me the why, and reading the tech news and email lists on Systemd keeps me informed. While it is easy enough to find outraged posts, it is harder to find educated threads that really discuss the matter deliberately and calmly. You will find the same common threads:

0. Systemd breaks POSIX and is incompatible with the BSDs. That is not good in regards to Debian, which claims to be the Universal OS, and runs counter to the open arms ideology Debian has always espoused.

1. Systemd has become monolithic. Too many dependancies create lockin. The code has become obfuscated and only a core cadre of devs really know whats going on. Sure, it is open source. Feel free to read through the thousands of lines of code to try to figure it out!

2. The most egregious is that one cannot run an alternate init system, such as SysV, OpenRC, or Upstart. So what? This runs counter to Debians Social Contract, which clearly states that the needs of its USERS come first. What if I don't want to run Systemd? A whole lot of folks don't want to run Systemd. So its tough luck for us! Use it or leave! Debian is an exclusive club now, or so the Debian Devs say on the mailing list, if you read it. But for Jessie, and probably only Jessie, alternate init may be possible thanks to a small handful of Devs who care about this stuff.

3. Systemd functions as a Windows-style svchost. Give a google on that to find out the obvious attack potential and exploitability of such a massive attack surface. Microsoft has been dealing with that for the last decade or more. Now, it's our turn!

4. The Systemd devs are "my way or F!ck Y$u"! Due to the dependancy lockin of a larger and larger core system component spread that are now tied to Systemd, nobody has a choice anymore. We all are now at the mercy of Lennart Poetering and his ilk. He has a growing number of major Distros all at his mercy. He has virtually all major upstream projects as a result by the throat. Why is that? As I said before, the fact that all major distros are locked into Systemd, and that Systemd has a huge number of dependant core functions, virtually every piece of software will have to tie-in to Systemd to work at all.

Above are just a tiny few reasons. I did not mention the UNIX model, because I am not that interested in it, although it does make a whole lot of sense. There are many more reasons. The only real way to find out which side you are on is to search and find out for yourself.

buntunub wrote:

thanatos_incarnate wrote:But feel free to keep me in the dark, that way I will surely be convinced of your way.

Nobody convinced me one way or the other in deciding to fight against Debians decision to foist Systemd on the next stable release. I came to that decision after a long bout of searching the net and reading the Systemd docs, as well as sifting through all the various blogs and forum posts about it on a whole host of websites and Distro specific entries. This is how it works. You have A LOT of reading to catch up on!

In the beginning I was as incrudulous as anyone that a piece of software could get anyone up in arms. Education has taught me the why, and reading the tech news and email lists on Systemd keeps me informed. While it is easy enough to find outraged posts, it is harder to find educated threads that really discuss the matter deliberately and calmly. You will find the same common threads:

0. Systemd breaks POSIX and is incompatible with the BSDs. That is not good in regards to Debian, which claims to be the Universal OS, and runs counter to the open arms ideology Debian has always espoused.

1. Systemd has become monolithic. Too many dependancies create lockin. The code has become obfuscated and only a core cadre of devs really know whats going on. Sure, it is open source. Feel free to read through the thousands of lines of code to try to figure it out!

2. The most egregious is that one cannot run an alternate init system, such as SysV, OpenRC, or Upstart. So what? This runs counter to Debians Social Contract, which clearly states that the needs of its USERS come first. What if I don't want to run Systemd? A whole lot of folks don't want to run Systemd. So its tough luck for us! Use it or leave! Debian is an exclusive club now, or so the Debian Devs say on the mailing list, if you read it. But for Jessie, and probably only Jessie, alternate init may be possible thanks to a small handful of Devs who care about this stuff.

3. Systemd functions as a Windows-style svchost. Give a google on that to find out the obvious attack potential and exploitability of such a massive attack surface. Microsoft has been dealing with that for the last decade or more. Now, it's our turn!

4. The Systemd devs are "my way or F!ck Y$u"! Due to the dependancy lockin of a larger and larger core system component spread that are now tied to Systemd, nobody has a choice anymore. We all are now at the mercy of Lennart Poetering and his ilk. He has a growing number of major Distros all at his mercy. He has virtually all major upstream projects as a result by the throat. Why is that? As I said before, the fact that all major distros are locked into Systemd, and that Systemd has a huge number of dependant core functions, virtually every piece of software will have to tie-in to Systemd to work at all.

Above are just a tiny few reasons. I did not mention the UNIX model, because I am not that interested in it, although it does make a whole lot of sense. There are many more reasons. The only real way to find out which side you are on is to search and find out for yourself.

*standing applause*, and lots of it. I already suggested Debdows as a new name for Debian, rather fitting. My personal fave is Debhat.

Edit: Has anybody seen this yet (General Resolution: init system coupling)? There may be hope afterall, I'm not holding my breath though, the Poetthat oligarchy is like a slime blob 'B' movie, smothering everything.