How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

Here you can discuss every aspect of Debian. Note: not for support requests!
Message
Author
User avatar
aicardi
Posts: 388
Joined: 2009-11-18 01:30
Location: Chicago

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

#121 Post by aicardi »

+1 ^^
Jessie/Xfce

User avatar
oswaldkelso
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2005-07-26 23:20
Location: UK
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

#122 Post by oswaldkelso »

Debian is what it is, if you don't love it anymore, just move on. And remember that Debian is a DISTRIBUTION!
Pretty much done.
Debian doesn't make code, apps, programs.
They get what's there and package it.
Not strictly true. Slackware does that. Debian is way more intrusive.
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.
Fighting "systemd doom" as you call it is about Debian remaining the "Universal operating system" If Debian Had chosen to offer a choice at install I would have had no real qualms about systemd. Having to install one system to install another of your choice makes you a slave of the first.
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.)
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.)
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).
It's not a sin It's a choice. Removing choice is the sin.
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.
Neutral! You are not.
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
Users seeking "purity" should not be seeking hope. They should be expecting unfettered choice from "The universal operating system"
Anyway, I have no real interest in the new Debian monoculture, so much so that my once prized Debian T-shirt is no longer on public display. Makes me very sad every time I see it and feel the need to cover it up.
Free Software Matters
Ash init durbatulûk, ash init gimbatul,
Ash init thrakatulûk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.

User avatar
mor
Posts: 970
Joined: 2010-08-28 15:16
Location: mor@debian

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

#123 Post by mor »

Oswald, how can you say I'm not neutral?
Just because I beg systemd detractors not to be childish assholes who call Poettering names and prophetize a systemd apocalipse every other post?
Or is it because I use it, or better yet, because it is in function on my system without me caring that much or having noticed much of a difference ever since?

If I'm not neutral what is neutral?
Either one is pro or against?

Are you pro emacs or nano?
I'm neutral again.

Anyway, I think one safe major point to reduce everything to, is the "removal of choice" argument.

You are complaining that Debian is no longer offering you a choice.
But then again you also say it is just harder.

What is it?
Harder or no choice?

Nevermind, what should have been in you opinion Debian's course of action?
Should they have done what Devuan is doing?
Strip every trace away like gangrene?

And how would have that solution preserved the choice for the other?
I mean, maintaining the "pure" no-systemd distro would have had to be an exclusive choice, seen how extensive systemd is and how cumbersome and laborious it is to eradicate it from every upstream source that independently from Debian's will requires it.

So basically Debian should have made a choice, like it did, just your choice.

Oswald, believe it or not, I don't support systemd: understanding the technical implications and nuances of this issue is above me. If when systemd entered my system I was told that sysvinit had just changed how to start and stop services I would have never even imagined something that big had happened.
But that's me, I'm just a user, you are certainly entitled to feel disappointed and annoyed. Still, trust me when I say I don't have a favorite.

I use the Debian system like I did for more than ten years so far, I trust that Debian developers know what they are doing and I trust that the sane systemd detractors will keep an eye open against any shenanigan.
If and when Debian will no longer be ok for me, I'll see what's out there and if nothing will be fine I will simply and finally ( :lol: ) take the "alone in the woods" route which is not bad at all to say the truth.
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.)
Agreed.
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!
(Maybe there is, is there? Please tell me that there is something like that!)

Actually no, I don't think those things are insane or stupid.
Those are limitations of a framework that cannot give you everything and that usually have nothing to do with choice, but more with resources or, at worst, preferences like coding in one language instead of another, or for one specific environment.

Freedom of choice has nothing to do with how many choices are there or how incompatible they can be between them.
The quantity, quality and cross compatibility of choices only depends on how many people offer how many and how compatible choices.

Sysvinit is still very much usable and systemd is still very much avoidable, and I also remember reading that some sort of choice about installing systemd or sysvinit was introduced in the installer prior to the Jessie release (but hey, I don't know for sure).

I called it "systemd doom" not on my own but paraphrasing all those who constantly refer to it even simply existing as the ultimate signs of the apocalypse.
As I said, I don't know enough to understand the technical implications of such a software revolution (in positive or negative, if we can call it that), but one thing I know is that there are a few, much less vocal unfortunately, systemd detractors who speak about how it is badly engineered and poorly executed and not about how Redhat is taking over the world, and that their voices get lost in the shitheaded and fanatical festival of antics brought on by the mobbing multitude of fud-spreaders namecalling doomsday wannabe-preachers who seem to have a found a new reason to get up in the morning in running wild everywhere and tainting every discussion with their non constructive, childish and annoying behavior.

Them I want to get rid of, or better yet I want them to grow up, and stop being idiotic, deluded, paranoid hatemongers.

Sorry for the rant and the lengthy post.

Bye :)

PAP
Posts: 67
Joined: 2007-03-02 13:34

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

#124 Post by PAP »

mor wrote:
PAP wrote:Anyway, I am not here to start a pointless flame war, but to find a solution
No, you are not here to find a solution.
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:Debian is what it is, if you don't love it anymore, just move on. And remember that Debian is a DISTRIBUTION!
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 doesn't make code, apps, programs.
They get what's there and package it.
Complete nonsense. Debian does NOT do just that.
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.
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: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.)
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 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).
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: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.
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.

VERDICT: Thank you all others who tried to help in this thread. I finally decided I cannot accept solution (2), as described in my post above - which seems to be the only one (for Debian). systemd-shim will still run systemd components "required" for a given application to run. This means my Debian days (quite numerous, by the way) come to an end. My second computer already runs Slackware since yesterday; the packaging system is far from being comparable to the excellent Debian package manager, but well... it's still a great, respectable distro, and certainly better than running poettering-crapware. But I also have other distro options, which I am experimenting with right now.
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. Sadly, Debian is not an option anymore.
Farewell.
Linux Salix 3.10.17 #2 SMP Fri Feb 14 16:45:28 CST 2014 x86_64
Last Debian used: Linux debian 3.16.0-4-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 3.16.7-ckt9-3 (2015-04-23) x86_64 GNU/Linux

dzz
Posts: 257
Joined: 2007-02-05 20:39
Location: Devon, England

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

#125 Post by dzz »

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.

User avatar
mardybear
Posts: 994
Joined: 2014-01-19 03:30

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

#126 Post by mardybear »

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!
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).

Although you don't appear to see it this way, systemd is a similar lock-in. Why should systemd libraries be required because i want to setup a printer? What the heck does an init system have to do with printing? Does that make any sense? Is that freedom of choice?

PAP: Your posts have been informative. Interesting to hear how difficult it has become for the average user to run Linux without any systemd. Someone mentioned recently that Slackware will likely change to systemd. IMO the best options are to either learn FreeBSD or use a Linux distribution that utilizes BusyBox. Good luck with your travels, wherever you end up.

You might find this informative:
http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=118319

Edit:
PAP wrote: Slackware since yesterday; the packaging system is far from being comparable to the excellent Debian package manager
It pretty much sucks...
800mhz, 512mb ram, dCore-jessie (Tiny Core with Debian Jessie packages) with BusyBox and Fluxbox.
Most don't have computer access, reuse or pay forward an old computer.

User avatar
Head_on_a_Stick
Posts: 13446
Joined: 2014-06-01 17:46
Location: /dev/chair

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

#127 Post by Head_on_a_Stick »

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.
FreeBSD is absolutely excellent and the package manager (pkg) is awesome.

Also, Slackware will almost certainly be using systemd soon...
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions ... 175523380/
Black Lives Matter

Debian buster-backports ISO image: for new hardware support

confuseling
Posts: 2143
Joined: 2009-10-21 01:03

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

#128 Post by confuseling »

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).
...
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?
The Forum's search box is terrible. Use site specific search, e.g.
https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3A ... terms+here

User avatar
golinux
Posts: 1581
Joined: 2010-12-09 00:56
Location: not a 'buntard!

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

#129 Post by golinux »

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?
*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.
May the FORK be with you!

User avatar
dilberts_left_nut
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 5148
Joined: 2009-10-05 07:54
Location: enzed
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

#130 Post by dilberts_left_nut »

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?
AdrianTM wrote:There's no hacker in my grandma...

confuseling
Posts: 2143
Joined: 2009-10-21 01:03

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

#131 Post by confuseling »

I generally prefer the smaller ones, and even then the mechanism seems imperfect (or at least inelegant). I think with infinite resources they'd make removing parts of them friendlier, and there arguably ought to be finer divisions between 'depends' and 'recommends'.

But I don't see how that makes metapackages bad, or how else you could distribute large groups of binaries (without putting them all in one package, which can only be worse).
The Forum's search box is terrible. Use site specific search, e.g.
https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3A ... terms+here

User avatar
golinux
Posts: 1581
Joined: 2010-12-09 00:56
Location: not a 'buntard!

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

#132 Post by golinux »

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?
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,
May the FORK be with you!

User avatar
dilberts_left_nut
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 5148
Joined: 2009-10-05 07:54
Location: enzed
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

#133 Post by dilberts_left_nut »

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,
Presumably because not everybody knows (or cares) exactly which packages are required to work together to provide a given set of functions.
But, yes, of course - there is no requirement to install any metapackages at all if you don't want.
But if you have, and then find that you don't want some of it, just remove it and mark the bits you want to keep.
AdrianTM wrote:There's no hacker in my grandma...

User avatar
edbarx
Posts: 5410
Joined: 2007-07-18 06:19
Location: 35° 50 N, 14 º 35 E

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

#134 Post by edbarx »

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.
I tried Devuan's debootstrap several times, but it was all in vain. Devuan's debootstrap is failing when it tries to call mount in a chroot, notwithstanding at that instant, mount is severely broken. To check I used ldd on the installed mount in Devuan's partition, and found several, not just one, .so file missing! I suspect mount should not be called through chroot at that instant, but instead, the script should call the host OS's mount.

At this time, I am using Debian's Testing which is running smoothly with xfce4 installed. Under sysvinit, I was having several problems that prevented medit, xfce-terminal and vlc to even run. So, I had to revert to allow systemd and Co. to be installed.

However, I am all ears to listen what I should do to get a running Devuan installation, but sadly, I am failing.
Debian == { > 30, 000 packages }; Debian != systemd
The worst infection of all, is a false sense of security!
It is hard to get away from CLI tools.

User avatar
mardybear
Posts: 994
Joined: 2014-01-19 03:30

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

#135 Post by mardybear »

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?
I do understand metapackages, that's why i despise them. On the contrary, the only sane way would be to keep individual applications seperate from the get-go so they could be installed independently of each other in any combination desired. Then the system could better approach true modularity. As Debian utilizes precompiled binaries and has good package management, building up a system in this manner isn't particularly difficult or time consuming.
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,
Thank-you...some sanity in the wilderness of madness.
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.
Sad but true. Everyone has a different agenda, but all users should care what goes into their systems.
800mhz, 512mb ram, dCore-jessie (Tiny Core with Debian Jessie packages) with BusyBox and Fluxbox.
Most don't have computer access, reuse or pay forward an old computer.

User avatar
mor
Posts: 970
Joined: 2010-08-28 15:16
Location: mor@debian

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

#136 Post by mor »

mardybear wrote:
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!
Could you please then modify your signature. Nobody should need to love metapackages.
Could you have been more superficial on this one?

Have you actually read my post? Not saying entirely, just a few lines after the ones you quoted?

I'll help you:
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!
(Maybe there is, is there? Please tell me that there is something like that!)

Actually no, I don't think those things are insane or stupid.

(emphasis added)
And have you actually read the thread linked in my signature? Do you actually understand that the title is a pun on a movie title, written by confuseling exactly to explain people who get tangled with metapackages how to deal with them?

No you haven't, please do yourself a favor and read that thread, it'll teach you how metapackages work.

By the way, in this thread where it seems like one can only love or hate something and being neutral is only ok for Switzerland, I don't love or hate metapackages (just like I don't hate or love systemd).
Metapackages are just tools, which I understand (also thanks to the guide by confuseling, reason why I link it in my signature) and use when I need or don't use when I don't need.
mardybear wrote: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).
In a few years, if I have to bet on any outcome, this issue will have faded and be replaced by the next one, maybe about some new distro based on some new kernel that will compete with the "linuxes". But you might be right, we might be really headed towards disaster, or not. Can we agree that in the meantime we should act like adults, talk about things that are real and not imaginary like Redhat wanting world domination or Poettering wanting to **** everybody in the ass?
Because that's really the problem here.

My issue in fact is not with people against systemd, is with people who hate systemd apriori (likely with the same level of understanding that I have) and who pester every thread with their resentful and bitter tirades, calling names and acting like they have seen the light and imply that everybody else who's not gone crazy about the advent of systemd as they did, is either an idiot or evil and complacent with the supposed dark side they only can see.
They piss me off for their childish behavior (and, admittedly, that's my problem) but more importantly because they do harm to the very cause of all the legitimate and informative anti-systemd criticism getting diluted in a sea of fanatic paranoia (and that my friend, is your problem, our problem).

If I were just a little bit more capable of understanding the technical aspects of the issue and happened to agree on how systemd is bad, I would be ten times more pissed off at these clowns.

Which brings me to PAP.
You can choose to read my "insults" as directed to you, or you can read my posts thinking that you are one of the sane, legitimate and (admired by me) anti-systemd detractors.
It depends on how you see yourself as.

If you are, and see yourself as, a rational and objective person, who understands the technical aspects of the issue and cares about finding ways to work on a solution, directly or indirectly, then why didn't you think I was referring to guys like you when I spoke of "sane" detractors?
I'm pretty sure they know I was referring to them when they read my post(s), and they likely agree with me on the "stop being childish" issue.

But you chose to take offense, it only means to me that you rather identify yourself as one of those who thinks speaking of the apocalypse, mangling Poettering's name to rhyme with bowel movements and acting on blind faith in the fact that anything that has systemd in the name is inherently harmful, is far better and more constructive then getting really informed and acting like adults.

You know why I am not pro or against systemd?
Because I do not understand either.

I am honest about it, I simply have no clue about how one is better, worse, more convenient, less versatile, more adjustable or whatever.
Why would I say so if I was pro-systemd?
Wouldn't I have found at least one or two nice things to say about it?

Oh yes, I'm "defending it"!
What I'm defending is just mature discussion against child talk, is sanity against paranoia, is informative and sound posts against FUD spreading trolling.
And I think I'm doing a favor to the anti-systemd party, helping them in calling out and isolating assholes from within their lines.

I could have chosen to omit the fact I'm using systemd, or Gnome, or even lie and proclaim myself an anti-systemd man: how would you have been able to call me a liar on that?
Indeed, as I said, if I were a systemd detractor I would have been even more vocal about the need to quit with the shenanigans.

But quite frankly, even though I would like you to believe my good faith, I don't want fight you on that, and since it seems you are finally convinced that Debian is gone to the dark side and is no longer good for you, I suppose we won't have to see you anymore. Right?

In any case, take care.

Bye

User avatar
buntunub
Posts: 591
Joined: 2011-02-11 05:23

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

#137 Post by buntunub »

Is this anti-systemd thing still going on? Good. In TBH, everyone should know a lot about systemd by now. Ignorance is absolutely a crap excuse, because the dabate raged so hotly here that everyone should have taken at least a few minutes to find out about it. Those who didn't really should not even be commenting about systemd at all.

User avatar
mardybear
Posts: 994
Joined: 2014-01-19 03:30

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

#138 Post by mardybear »

mor wrote:
Have you actually read my post?
It's all a blur to me. Thanks for bolding for emphasis. Sorry if i offended you.
And have you actually read the thread linked in my signature?
...No you haven't, please do yourself a favor and read that thread, it'll teach you how metapackages work.
You're a scrapper. I like that but you really shouldn't tell people what they have/not read. I read through the link some time ago. I used a metapackage DE for almost 10 years and became quite intimate with metapackages and the hoops required to remove bloat. My opinion is unchanged, don't like them. Not everyone who disagrees with your opinion is ignorant.
By the way, in this thread where it seems like one can only love or hate something...I don't love or hate metapackages (just like I don't hate or love systemd).
The systemd argument will remain bipolar as it's a fundamental shift in the operations of Linuxland, not some trivial new software. It will pretty much make it impossible to run Debian without systemd libraries Jessie forward, as you should know based on the many previous posts on this exact subject.
Can we agree that in the meantime we should act like adults...
I've been an adult for a long time and would never use the language you just utilized.
They piss me off for their childish behavior (and, admittedly, that's my problem) but more importantly because they do harm to the very cause of all the legitimate and informative anti-systemd criticism getting diluted in a sea of fanatic paranoia (and that my friend, is your problem, our problem).
You are correct about the rants and childish behaviours. It will die down as detractors migrate away. Me thinks the recent Jessie stable release has caused commotion. Personally i'm in the process of migrating before Wheezy reaches EOL. FWIW my dislike for systemd is technical - have you read my signature? systemd is just the final straw, Debian and most distributions have become too bloated.
If I were just a little bit more capable of understanding the technical aspects of the issue...
You've claimed ignorance for some time. With all your Debian experience, running testing for years, you are still not capable of making a judgement or understanding the technical merits?

You just read PAP's experience and there are currently at least two other active threads from long time Debian users reluctantly leaving. Do some research and decide for yourself.

The other day there was a new Jessie user who did not yet install wireless firmware. He had to gut /var because the partition filled. By the time he rebooted and installed the firmware, the system reportedly generated something like 50MB of repetitive logs within a few seconds. There are many other Jessie stories on this forum. Of course, you could argue every new release has issues.

Quick research indicates traditional init is based on ~75 files and ~15,000 lines of code vs systemd's >900 files and >125,000 lines. Traditional init has been around and debugged forever and rarely causes problems. systemd is still in active development and is now being used by Debian, once regarded as the most conservative and stable Linux distribution around. Which init system will likely be more problematic? That's just the tip of the iceberg for technical arguments.

Most of the exerienced users on this forum have left in the last few months. I suspect it's much more than paranoia or an unwillingness to change.
800mhz, 512mb ram, dCore-jessie (Tiny Core with Debian Jessie packages) with BusyBox and Fluxbox.
Most don't have computer access, reuse or pay forward an old computer.

User avatar
Linadian
Posts: 490
Joined: 2013-12-20 15:25
Location: In a systemd free distro

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

#139 Post by Linadian »

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^systemd hating asshole, guilty as charged! And damn proud of it. Trying to convince me or anybody else avoiding systemd is paranoia or childish is not helping me avoid its stealth installation. If you prefer to have an overbearing, over controlling, bloated buggy piece of corporate-ware so tightly and deeply ingrained in your system, one false move brings the whole f*%#ing house of cards down, that's YOUR prerogative. Do you work for Redhat? Are you close friends with Lennart? What makes you so pro systemd biased? Do you get paid to promote it? Because it's no wunderkind to write home to mama about, that's for f%#*ing sure, it's a piece of bloat-ware $#1+, I've been reading piles of articles of how it screws up, and more appear everyday.

No preaching, if you've got some cool CL tricks to keep that $#1+ out of my system, then we're talking, otherwise...

Edit: Now THIS is paranoia, lol, there's a few truths hidden amongst the jokes, if anything, the read is good for a laugh.
Linux Registered User 533946

User avatar
mardybear
Posts: 994
Joined: 2014-01-19 03:30

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

#140 Post by mardybear »

systemd (Score:5, Insightful)
by rl117 (110595) <rleigh.codelibre@net> on Sunday April 26, 2015 @05:17AM (#49554047) Homepage

After using and developing Debian for 18 years, this is the first release I have no plans to use, all thanks to the gnome and systemd idiocy. It hasn't been a nice experience, seeing a system build up with loving care by so many people over so long being willfully trashed by a small handful of people. I for one have no interest in being RedHat's bitch; if I wanted to be, I'd be a suffering Fedora or CentOS user. Debian has lost its independence and freedom.

I've been using FreeBSD for nearly 18 months now, and rarely boot up Debian on my systems or VMs. Going back 5 years, I'd never have imagined this is the way things would play out. Tragic.
http://linux.slashdot.org/story/15/04/2 ... e-released

Is anyone familiar with this ex-developer?
800mhz, 512mb ram, dCore-jessie (Tiny Core with Debian Jessie packages) with BusyBox and Fluxbox.
Most don't have computer access, reuse or pay forward an old computer.

Post Reply