4 ms·

Ubuntu is Linux, I don't use Ubuntu. I use mostly OpenSUSE/SUSE and sometimes Arch or a Redhat version and if I must Ubuntu or Debian. It will work in Linux jus

by baldfat 11y ago

Ubuntu is Linux, I don't use Ubuntu. I use mostly OpenSUSE/SUSE and sometimes Arch or a Redhat version and if I must Ubuntu or Debian. It will work in Linux just wish we had a solid second tier desktop Distro. Gone are the days when distros decided if something worked or didn't. Thanks to things like SystemD this will continue down that road (Ducks). Also hoping we finally do package management in a elegant modern way soon and not like we are right now.

vezzy-fnord 11y ago
Thanks to things like SystemD this will continue down that road (Ducks). How? systemd touches a completely different layer. The main thing that might prevent ELF interoperability across distributions is if the distro has some esoterically configured binutils/glibc toolchain and the provided application is a dynamically linked binary blob.
- baldfat 11y ago
  SystemD pretty much takes over the core of the OS. This has helped the trend of Distros being interoperational with each other. This is why some people HATE SystemD. Before SystemD we had init scripts in our thousands of packages. Each package system would have different init systems and procedures. This is one of the big reasons why things were not inter-operational between distros. This is why Arch and Debian among others distros jumped off their old init systems and adopted SystemD.
  - vezzy-fnord 11y ago
    The package systems never had init system integration. What some PMs did was they ran procedures in the postinstall scripts to do things like update SysV symlink farms. In Debian, this was done by sysv-rc and in RPM-based distros, chkconfig or something similar. They're completely orthogonal tools. And no, it was hardly a "big reason" why distros weren't interoperable. Initscripts were rarely supplied by upstream vendors and frequently written downstream. Then many other people didn't use them at all, but wrote runscripts for some flavor of daemontools in about 4 lines or something. The main reason has always boiled down to the toolchain. One proposed way to get around it was fat ELF binaries, but that effort got metaphorically curbstomped by the Linux community. Universal package managers aren't supported for political/branding reasons. In any event, systemd doesn't help with this.
    - baldfat 11y ago
      > The package systems never had init system integration Never said integration saying packages have scripts to init themselves and that was different based on your distro. Don't know why you feel the need to correct a point that distros are becoming more and more alike and that systemd is one of the elements that has helped this? Anywaysssss SystemD is the standard now for most of Linux and I am hoping for MORE standardization.
      - vezzy-fnord 11y ago
        Distros are undeniably becoming more alike thanks to systemd, but from this premise does not in any way follow that package interoperability will be improved, which was the topic at hand. (To be pedantic, there is no "standardization" so to speak of. It's more like an informal fiat than anything.)
        baldfat 11y ago
        BUT deamons are now standardized on how to init them into systemd.
      - digi_owl 11y ago
        "standardization" straight out of the MS play book that is...
        baldfat 11y ago
        For what monetary end game???? I don't want to start the SystemD debates again but what "play" out of the playbook with what evil end game motivation?
        digi_owl 11y ago
        Does it have to be monetary? Best i can tell, the people involved are on what may border on a holy crusade to "improve" the desktop Linux experience. Meaning that to them the goal justifies the means. And if you question this you are simply an ignorant infidel that will see the light in due time, they just need to spread the gospel more fervently (or should i say forcefully?).
yellowapple 11y ago
As a Slackware user, I'd hardly attribute the compatibility of "supported for Ubuntu, other distros be damned" software on non-Ubuntu distros on systemd :) Linux software is compatible with any GNU/Linux distribution (and even some non-GNU Linux distributions). It's only a matter of having the right libraries and environment installed. That might be easier when things standardize on things like systemd, but for most software, such implementation details rarely matter.
- baldfat 11y ago
  No the WHOLE POINT was Linux is coming CLOSER to each other and SystemD is ONE example of standardizing in the general Linux community.

by baldfat 11y ago

vezzy-fnord 11y ago

Thanks to things like SystemD this will continue down that road (Ducks). How? systemd touches a completely different layer. The main thing that might prevent ELF interoperability across distributions is if the distro has some esoterically configured binutils/glibc toolchain and the provided application is a dynamically linked binary blob.

baldfat 11y ago
SystemD pretty much takes over the core of the OS. This has helped the trend of Distros being interoperational with each other. This is why some people HATE SystemD. Before SystemD we had init scripts in our thousands of packages. Each package system would have different init systems and procedures. This is one of the big reasons why things were not inter-operational between distros. This is why Arch and Debian among others distros jumped off their old init systems and adopted SystemD.
- vezzy-fnord 11y ago
  The package systems never had init system integration. What some PMs did was they ran procedures in the postinstall scripts to do things like update SysV symlink farms. In Debian, this was done by sysv-rc and in RPM-based distros, chkconfig or something similar. They're completely orthogonal tools. And no, it was hardly a "big reason" why distros weren't interoperable. Initscripts were rarely supplied by upstream vendors and frequently written downstream. Then many other people didn't use them at all, but wrote runscripts for some flavor of daemontools in about 4 lines or something. The main reason has always boiled down to the toolchain. One proposed way to get around it was fat ELF binaries, but that effort got metaphorically curbstomped by the Linux community. Universal package managers aren't supported for political/branding reasons. In any event, systemd doesn't help with this.
  - baldfat 11y ago
    > The package systems never had init system integration Never said integration saying packages have scripts to init themselves and that was different based on your distro. Don't know why you feel the need to correct a point that distros are becoming more and more alike and that systemd is one of the elements that has helped this? Anywaysssss SystemD is the standard now for most of Linux and I am hoping for MORE standardization.
    - vezzy-fnord 11y ago
      Distros are undeniably becoming more alike thanks to systemd, but from this premise does not in any way follow that package interoperability will be improved, which was the topic at hand. (To be pedantic, there is no "standardization" so to speak of. It's more like an informal fiat than anything.)
      - baldfat 11y ago
        BUT deamons are now standardized on how to init them into systemd.
    - digi_owl 11y ago
      "standardization" straight out of the MS play book that is...
      - baldfat 11y ago
        For what monetary end game???? I don't want to start the SystemD debates again but what "play" out of the playbook with what evil end game motivation?
        digi_owl 11y ago
        Does it have to be monetary? Best i can tell, the people involved are on what may border on a holy crusade to "improve" the desktop Linux experience. Meaning that to them the goal justifies the means. And if you question this you are simply an ignorant infidel that will see the light in due time, they just need to spread the gospel more fervently (or should i say forcefully?).

yellowapple 11y ago

As a Slackware user, I'd hardly attribute the compatibility of "supported for Ubuntu, other distros be damned" software on non-Ubuntu distros on systemd :) Linux software is compatible with any GNU/Linux distribution (and even some non-GNU Linux distributions). It's only a matter of having the right libraries and environment installed. That might be easier when things standardize on things like systemd, but for most software, such implementation details rarely matter.

baldfat 11y ago
No the WHOLE POINT was Linux is coming CLOSER to each other and SystemD is ONE example of standardizing in the general Linux community.