Page 9 of 11

Re: What should we do about systemd?

Posted: 2014-11-19 20:55
by keithpeter
Linadian wrote:
fruitofloom wrote:
twoflowers wrote:That was to be expected. Well, good bye Debian
Pretty much that.
This is a very dark day indeed. I see no point in keeping Wheezy on my computer since it has no viable future.
Steady on chaps.

You have a year of Wheezy at least probably 18 months. The Refracta crew are brewing their strange brews. There was a person on Debian-Users a few weeks ago asking for help with an Etch install. One hopes (s)he was sitting the PC behind a decent hardware firewall. If the systemd decliners can muster sufficient resources, there will be a viable 'light' sysvinit desktop under Jessie.

That all buys time. Alternatives will emerge.

Re: What should we do about systemd?

Posted: 2014-11-19 21:41
by dasein
keithpeter wrote:Food for thought: What is the median age of Debian developers? How has that statistic changed over the last 5 years? Could the recent turbulence in Debian's internal governance be a generational thing?
Even if the median age hasn't changed, I daresay this is almost certainly a generational thing, at least in part.

It is a luxury of youth to imagine that one is markedly smarter than one's predecessors. Every time I hear some young turk talk about the need to completely redo something from scratch, I cringe. Moreso when it's something crufty and old like *nix init. Because if I learned anything in the 15 years I wrote code for a living, it's that every one of those kludges, every one of those "ugly" patches, every one of those incomprehensible-seeming workarounds represents a solution to a problem that the original designers failed to anticipate.

There is a generation's worth of expertise and wisdom embedded in that crufty old code: throwing it out and starting over is like lobotomizing oneself. Because it ignores the lessons of the past, the newer, shinier gizmo has no meaningful hope of being any better than whatever it's replacing. The "best case" scenario is that shiny new bugs will replace crufty old bugs. (Although in the case of systemd, there's the additional layer of problems inherent in any monolithic middleware design.)

(Side note: Oracle Linux is RedHat.)

I have to say that I'm disappointed but not at all surprised by the voting results. As soon as I saw the "no GR needed" amendment offered by the current DPL, I recognized it as a subtle way of providing "political cover" for everyone who wanted to avoid the hard choice.

I'm saddened. Haven't quite figured out yet exactly what I'll do, but to my mind, "Lennax" is really no different from Windows, much less any better.

One last thought. My posting history makes it clear that I've been an active systemd hater for several years now. But keithpeter is quite right. The impotent rage, the endless name-calling, the unnecessary melodrama and empty invective that permeated every systemd thread on this board over the last month ultimately served only to weaken the folks who had (and no doubt still have) legitimate technical reasons for mistrusting systemd. (Just sayin')

Re: What should we do about systemd?

Posted: 2014-11-19 22:12
by fleabus
dasein wrote:Haven't quite figured out yet exactly what I'll do, but to my mind, "Lennax" is really no different from Windows, much less any better.
I really wish they'd created their own thing, their "CoreOS" if that's what they wanted. I wish they'd done it from the ground up and left Linux alone.
I don't know what I'll ultimately do either.

Re: What should we do about systemd?

Posted: 2014-11-20 00:10
by mmix
Ian Jackson Resigns From The Debian Technical Committee
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=n ... px=MTg0NDA

if you want to avoid systemd distro, look here
http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=118319

Re: What should we do about systemd?

Posted: 2014-11-20 00:59
by KBD47
mmix wrote:Ian Jackson Resigns From The Debian Technical Committee
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=n ... px=MTg0NDA

if you want to avoid systemd distro, look here
http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=118319
These guys are dropping like flies. Is anyone left in charge of Debian?

Re: What should we do about systemd?

Posted: 2014-11-20 01:05
by buntunub
KBD47 wrote:
mmix wrote:Ian Jackson Resigns From The Debian Technical Committee
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=n ... px=MTg0NDA

if you want to avoid systemd distro, look here
http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=118319
These guys are dropping like flies. Is anyone left in charge of Debian?
I think we are seeing the exodus of all those who value freedom of choice, since there is now none in Debian. Perhaps we will see if that fork takes shape, and those Devs who are leaving should have a refuge there.

Re: What should we do about systemd?

Posted: 2014-11-20 01:16
by golinux
buntunub wrote:I think we are seeing the exodus of all those who value freedom of choice, since there is now none in Debian. Perhaps we will see if that fork takes shape, and those Devs who are leaving should have a refuge there.
Several of the resignations I've read stated that they were leaving the TC but continuing to work on Debian related projects.

Re: What should we do about systemd?

Posted: 2014-11-20 01:42
by tomazzi
keithpeter wrote:
tomazzi wrote:And I think, that with systemd, RedHat is going to "take the leadership" of linux again, by enforcing it's own solution. Since all the systemd developers are paid RedHat employees, then they can take over the service market (in all of the aspects).
All source code available. Oracle can afford to (and do) pay bright people, and historically that is exactly what they have done.
You don't understand what's going on...
Yes, in case (and until) the OS is build with simple and stable "bricks", then it's sufficient to just hire a programmer who knows C and has sufficient knowledge of GNU/Linux.

But now we're dealing with never-yet-frozen complex software, which has thousants of non-trivial inter-process dependancies, which additonally can change "just-like-that" in the next version (breaking another packages/rules "just-like-that") , tests are simple and limitted, not to say: dumb and insufficient.
f.e. systemd DNS daemon is totally insecure piece of crap - everyone knows that, and there are thousants of links to pages, where detailed explanation of this fact can be found...

However RedHat have managed to force this crap on Linux - and nobody knows what will change in systemd tommorow - nobody can provide paid support for it, unless someone would like to risk loosing customers or even getting sued.

Currently, noone besides RedHat can provide paid systemd support. Besides, even if systemd will eventually get frozen, then sill corporations will prefer to have support directly from the authors/developers...

got it?

Re: What should we do about systemd?

Posted: 2014-11-20 11:48
by edbarx
On debianfork chat, someone said that he was using his own OS initialisation daemon, which only runs a script at system startup. This looks like an irresistible temptation, what do you expect from a daemon, eh? :twisted:

The procedure is as easy as to write a simple daemon in C/C++ that calls a script at startup. Let me begin. This will be yet another adventure for me... :)

I found this is a daemon's skeleton. How come, daemons are spirits, if I recall correctly?

Code: Select all

#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <syslog.h>
#include <string.h>

int main(void) {
        
        /* Our process ID and Session ID */
        pid_t pid, sid;
        
        /* Fork off the parent process */
        pid = fork();
        if (pid < 0) {
                exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
        }
        /* If we got a good PID, then
           we can exit the parent process. */
        if (pid > 0) {
                exit(EXIT_SUCCESS);
        }

        /* Change the file mode mask */
        umask(0);
                
        /* Open any logs here */        
                
        /* Create a new SID for the child process */
        sid = setsid();
        if (sid < 0) {
                /* Log the failure */
                exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
        }
        

        
        /* Change the current working directory */
        if ((chdir("/")) < 0) {
                /* Log the failure */
                exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
        }
        
        /* Close out the standard file descriptors */
        close(STDIN_FILENO);
        close(STDOUT_FILENO);
        close(STDERR_FILENO);
        
        /* Daemon-specific initialization goes here */
        
        /* The Big Loop */
        while (1) {
           /* Do some task here ... */
           
           sleep(30); /* wait 30 seconds */
        }
   exit(EXIT_SUCCESS);
Added Later 1:
I am still stuck at trying to figure out how zombie processes are cleared. After that, it will be testing time. This is the transformed daemon code, although it needs more scrutiny before it will(will it?) spring into life.

Code: Select all

#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <syslog.h>
#include <string.h>

int main(void) {
       
        // Our process ID and Session ID 
        pid_t pid, sid;
       
        // Fork off the parent process 
        pid = fork();
        if (pid < 0) return -1; //failure
	
	
        // If we got a good PID, then we can exit the parent process.
        if (pid > 0) return 0;

        // Change the file mode mask
        umask(0);
               
        // Open any logs here       
               
        // Create a new SID for the child process
        sid = setsid();
        if (sid < 0) {
                // Log the failure
                return -2;
        }
       

       
        // Change the current working directory
        if ((chdir("/")) < 0) {
                // Log the failure
                return -3;
        }
       
        // Close out the standard file descriptors 
        close(STDIN_FILENO);
        close(STDOUT_FILENO);
        close(STDERR_FILENO);
       
        // Daemon-specific initialization goes here
        system("/os-loader");
        // The Infinite Loop
        while (1) {
           // Do some task here
           
           sleep(1);
        }
   return 0;
}  

Re: What should we do about systemd?

Posted: 2014-11-20 16:09
by Naron
I do not understand why people hate so much systemd. There are objective (technical) arguments against systemd?
I'm a simple user, without any technical knowledge, but I feel, after I read the discussions from here, that the arguments against systemd are more emotional than technical.
I read what other people say about systemd and it does not seem so bad.
That's why I ask here.

Re: What should we do about systemd?

Posted: 2014-11-20 16:55
by aicardi
Naron wrote:I do not understand why people hate so much systemd. There are objective (technical) arguments against systemd?
I'm a simple user, without any technical knowledge, but I feel, after I read the discussions from here, that the arguments against systemd are more emotional than technical.
I read what other people say about systemd and it does not seem so bad.
That's why I ask here.
tomazzi explained this very well just (2) posts prior to yours.

Re: What should we do about systemd?

Posted: 2014-11-20 17:48
by golinux
aicardi wrote:
Naron wrote:I do not understand why people hate so much systemd. There are objective (technical) arguments against systemd?
I'm a simple user, without any technical knowledge, but I feel, after I read the discussions from here, that the arguments against systemd are more emotional than technical.
I read what other people say about systemd and it does not seem so bad.
That's why I ask here.
tomazzi explained this very well just (2) posts prior to yours.
He's just trolling. Any id10t could get those answers with one simple search.

Re: What should we do about systemd?

Posted: 2014-11-21 00:45
by buntunub
I think the real question is, WHY?!

Why this rush to get Systemd into Jessie?
Why is it nobody who voted to derail Ian's GR can explain to all of us why they did so?
Why is it the DDs feel the need to table any discussion of decoupling Systemd dependancies so that people can run other things without being forced to run Systemd, even without their knowing about it happening, as in the case with libpam?

When I started down this road right here, I asked, begged even, for some Systemd fanbois to explain to me why they are doing what they are doing to Debian. I am still waiting.

Re: What should we do about systemd?

Posted: 2014-11-21 01:02
by dasein
buntunub wrote:I am still waiting.
I'm still waiting one step further back, for someone to identify a specific problem that systemd solves. No one can rewrite decades worth of code from scratch without screwing a lot of things up. So there needs to be some specific, identifiable (and, I'm sorry, utterly compelling) benefit to doing so.

(And no, design "aesthetics" do not constitute a genuine problem.)

Re: What should we do about systemd?

Posted: 2014-11-21 01:37
by mmix
may be unification, lindows. :P
in lindows world, there will be no more debian, because it called "Lindows[TM]".

Re: What should we do about systemd?

Posted: 2014-11-21 01:53
by Linadian
Naron wrote:I do not understand why people hate so much systemd. There are objective (technical) arguments against systemd?
I'm a simple user, without any technical knowledge, but I feel, after I read the discussions from here, that the arguments against systemd are more emotional than technical.
I read what other people say about systemd and it does not seem so bad.
That's why I ask here.
Because metaphorically, it's the software equivalent of an alien penetrating your brain and nervous system with numerous worm-like tentacles and operating your body and personality like you're a zombie being controlled by the Borg, and because the main dev little snot thinks the rest of the world should write their software around his beta $#1+, he's a f#%king little ladder climber that works for a corporation, desperately seeking fame and a name for himself. The only thing he's achieving is infamy for dividing the (LIBRE) Linux world and possibly bringing it to its knees. If you don't understand the tech aspects or the politics then maybe you're using the wrong distro and you're in the wrong forum, maybe Ubuntu might be better suited to you.

Ya know, this disturbing trend started with Debian licking Canonical's feces exit orifice, now they're extending their tongue to Redhat, hence my new name for Debian, Redshat+Ewbuntu+Debian=REDBUNTIAN.

Re: What should we do about systemd?

Posted: 2014-11-21 09:08
by rhy7s
Linadian wrote:
Naron wrote:I do not understand why people hate so much systemd. There are objective (technical) arguments against systemd?
I'm a simple user, without any technical knowledge, but I feel, after I read the discussions from here, that the arguments against systemd are more emotional than technical.
I read what other people say about systemd and it does not seem so bad.
That's why I ask here.
Because metaphorically, it's the software equivalent of an alien penetrating your brain and nervous system with numerous worm-like tentacles and operating your body and personality like you're a zombie being controlled by the Borg, and because the main dev little snot thinks the rest of the world should write their software around his beta $#1+, he's a f#%king little ladder climber that works for a corporation, desperately seeking fame and a name for himself. The only thing he's achieving is infamy for dividing the (LIBRE) Linux world and possibly bringing it to its knees. If you don't understand the tech aspects or the politics then maybe you're using the wrong distro and you're in the wrong forum, maybe Ubuntu might be better suited to you.

Ya know, this disturbing trend started with Debian licking Canonical's feces exit orifice, now they're extending their tongue to Redhat, hence my new name for Debian, Redshat+Ewbuntu+Debian=REDBUNTIAN.
I'm not totally comfortable with the way things are going, but you haven't answered the question posed. Metaphor, ad-hominem, appeal to motive, some sort of secret club or appeal to authority, crudity. It doesn't instil confidence in your position. I understand you're discomforted by the situation we're in, maybe you could link to a synopsis that explains why?

Re: What should we do about systemd?

Posted: 2014-11-21 15:44
by edbarx
My little daemon could also load Debian. With more tweaking it can be yet another OS initialisation option. You may wonder why I am doing this: I don't blame you for asking why someone would go through all the pain of recreating yet another init system, notwithstanding it is a really small one.

My aim, is to prove that there are open ways that freedom lovers can take, but they demand a lot of courage and perseverance.

This is more than enough coding and tweaking for today.


The daemon's code is the following, although not matured, as it needs to respond to process handling signals.

Code: Select all

#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <syslog.h>
#include <string.h>



int main(void) {
	// Our process ID and Session ID 
	pid_t pid, sid;
       
	// Fork off the parent process 
	pid = fork();
	if (pid < 0) return -1; //failure
	
	
	// If we got a good PID, then we can exit the parent process.
	//if (pid > 0) return 0;

	// Change the file mode mask
	umask(0);
               
	// Open any logs here       
               
	// Create a new SID for the child process
	sid = setsid();
	if (sid < 0) {
	// Log the failure
		return -2;
	}
       

	// Change the current working directory
	if ((chdir("/")) < 0) {
		// Log the failure
		return -3;
	}
	
	//bool shell_avail = (system(0) != 0);
	system("/boot/os_loader");
    
	// Close out the standard file descriptors 
	close(STDIN_FILENO);
	close(STDOUT_FILENO);
	close(STDERR_FILENO);
       
	// Daemon-specific initialization goes here
	// The Infinite Loop
	while (1) {
		// Do some task here
		wait(0);
		sleep(1); 
	}
	
	return 0;
} 
/boot/os_loader is a script to load the necessary daemons/services.

Re: What should we do about systemd?

Posted: 2014-11-21 17:39
by Linadian
rhy7s wrote:It doesn't instil confidence in your position. I understand you're discomforted by the situation we're in, maybe you could link to a synopsis that explains why?
This person's page has about 5 related links in it, enjoy. Like I said previously, if anybody doesn't fully understand the implications virusd, then they haven't done their reading before opening their mouths.

Re: What should we do about systemd?

Posted: 2014-11-21 17:44
by anastasis
57% of voters have opted for something besides D) accept systemd and continue using Debian.

57%, folks.

Those numbers don't lie even in a small cross section.

GNU/Linux really, honest to goodness, is becoming like Microsoft Windows in its development approach. It is antithetical to the Unix blueprint. You'll remember that centralization began in Microsoft with Windows--the DE. Centralization in this case is being driven by the DE as well--GNOME. If it keeps going in this direction, and hear me out because this isn't conspiracy theory, you will see a day when there is nothing separating the GNOME DE from the systemd init from the Linux kernel. It will have all been centralized.

Then you will have your worst nightmare, because there will be NO PRACTICAL DIFFERENCE between your nemesis MS and you. You will have become what you hated most.

What is happening in the GNU/Linux world is astonishing to me. I never thought I would see this. I just never did.

I am honestly taken aback by this resolution from Debian development.

I think I can truly say that after this resolution, Debian is effectively no longer what it once was. For too many years now it has let itself become infiltrated with development that is simply adversarial to the Debian social contract.

Debian Squeeze was the last Debian distro. Debian sold its soul at its finest hour.

UNBELIEVABLE.

Now, there is really no structural difference in Ubuntu, Debian, Fedora, or OpenSuse. Systemd has taken over. And people are going to regret this. And I mean big time.

In retrospect, I now long for the days of 2005 when SUSE and KDE were kings of the hill. Those were better days and at least development was going in a GNU friendly direction.

And then came U-know-who.

There's only one question I would like every GNU/Linux user in the world to contemplate for a moment, which is "What are these idiots doing to my system?"

If this truly is the final resolution of Debian development, then I will financially SUPPORT and DEMAND a FORK at all cost and in all haste!

No, Debian, damn YOUR torpedoes!

I CAME TO DEBIAN TO GET AWAY FROM CENTRALIZATION, YOU BUNCH OF APE-LIKE NUMBSKULLS! :x