[Derivatives][Unofficial Respin] MX-23.2 KDE 'init-diversity' Edition

[Prowler_Gr]

I would like to present an 'init-diversity' spin of the current release of MX Linux 23.2

Download link:
MX-23.2_KDE_init-diversity-edition_UNOFFICIAL_20240222.iso
& torrent file:
mx-23.2-kde-init-diversity-edition-unofficial-20240222_archive.torrent

This spin includes 5 inits (sysvinit – systemd – s6-rc – s6-66 – runit), all able to run live & available to install.
This spin is in the MX distro’s spirit which is similar to Debian's spirit (systemd binaries fully present & utilised by other inits as well as systemd).

Credits should go to all contributors & testers of the original 'init-diversity' antiX-23 spin, especially @anticapitalista , aitor of Gnuinos, Eric of Obarun & of course @BitJam for his live initramfs patch which made this iso possible.

[CwF]

Question - Why would I care?
Seriously. There is a few years old post on here that I ask that, no answers. It comes up still, still no answer really.

When I tried the various ways it all seemed like trying to tell the difference in chocolate milk. Was it stirred clockwise or counterclockwise, with a spoon or a fork or a spork, or was it shaken? I think if shaken there is a higher probability of getting flavor clumps and I don't know in this analogy what that means?

Both memory footprint and speed are not relevant, or significant anymore. It inits, it's done, so...?

I'd guess a custom kernel would have significantly better impact on low power machines. Past that I found no actionable or demonstrable advantage from one init to the other. I did find, or at least had the notion, that one or the other is more likely to lead to a future technical debt some may not anticipate. With some other recent post on "init-freedom' - could anyone tell me what is at stake?

[oswaldkelso]

If you don’t care or don’t care enough to see why you might, don’t worry about it.

As for memory footprint and speed relevance, or significance I suspect you know as well as me that this was a major “selling point of systemd” back in the day. If it’s relevant now I don’t know or care. It’s not why I and others want init freedom. If systemd was just another init system no one would give a crap. Think window manager, editors, terminals etc. No body cares what someone else uses because it does not effect anything else. Systemd does that’s why it’s controversial.

What’s at stake? In a word. Choice.

I believe it’s more to do with individual user control, vs corporate control. Even Debian could not compete with the power of the big corporations pushing it. Their money meant they could over load the code base with such speed of change that a mere mostly volunteer powered entity like Debian could not keep up with them. This made the freeness of the software in effect irrelevant. Hence Debian in effect gave up the fight.

We see the same thing happening with wayland and the Linux kernel. We even have WSL doing the a similar thing. Reducing user power. This is about control. Nothing else. It used to be you ran “Windows” in a VM on top of Debian when you had to. Now Microsoft sponsors Debian and they run Debian on top of “Windows”. My newest laptop won’t boot. It has legacy mode that by default switches to UEFI. It’s so buggy that the CSM (compatibility support Module) won’t even boot the original Windows let alone Debian.

It’s all part of the same problem. Corporate power dictating to the individual by reducing or eliminating choice. Some people don’t like it, some people suck it up. Simple as that.

[sunrat]

Let's not start another init system flamewar here. The philosophical and practical concerns have been discussed endlessly in the past eg. - viewtopic.php?t=129881
Use what you like, there are options. Use the OP's respin if you want to try out some different ones. Use Devuan or Antix if that's what you're into.
For most people, including me, it's a non-issue and the default works fine.

Discuss the OP's offering in this topic if you wish. Keep your comments on topic.

[Prowler_Gr]

What’s at stake? In a word. Choice.

This.

The actual goal is to bring the freedom to any Debian-based distro user to install & use any fully functioning init (even systemd if it is their choice), without them feeling that a specific init is being enforced, & without the need to have heated debates or GR in order to allow this.

Everybody here old enough would know about the heated 2014 GR which kinda led to a split, & the follow-up 2019 GR which was in the spirit to re-unite & allow supporting alternatives.
The problem at the time was that the s6 options were not mature enough to be seriously considered, so the debate was between the venerable but 'feature deficient' sysvinit & 'controversial' systemd.

Technically if you try the respin you will find each init works independently from each other (does not try & hijack folders & files used by other inits).
Debian can keep shipping with systemd linked to '/sbin/init' & the fully supported init, & interested parties can continue supporting other inits with relevant init scripts or frontend unit files...

Most users (myself included) do not mind using various systemd parts (or modules) on their systems.
However more than a few (myself included) simply want something else running as PID 1, & this spin's concept is in the spirit to address this.

[CwF]

Already then!
With the existence of this distro variation, 6 years after the linked good read, means the situation is in good shape.

Code: Select all

$  ps 1
  PID TTY      STAT   TIME COMMAND
    1 ?        Ss     0:07 /sbin/init

[anticapitalista]

Already then!
With the existence of this distro variation, 6 years after the linked good read, means the situation is in good shape.

Code: Select all

$  ps 1
  PID TTY      STAT   TIME COMMAND
    1 ?        Ss     0:07 /sbin/init

Wow - what a sarcastic post -- and from a Global Mod too

The init-diversity iso is a showcase of 5 init systems (3 of which are poorly supported in Debian). That is all.
All init systems on the iso have been built to work independently of each other and deb packages are available.
Therefore, it should be seen an an enhancement to Debian, not a competitor.

[CwF]

what a sarcastic post

It was not meant as such. It is simply dropping the subject...

In sunrat's linked post, and some links from there, there is lots of good stuff on the subject. I could link some comments from those, or from my own above to do exactly what was discouraged...

IMHO, linux is paralyzed by excessive choice. That is a thing...