4 ms·

http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_systemd http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_... http://systemd-free.org/ ht

by moe 11y ago

http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_systemd http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_... http://systemd-free.org/ http://systemd-free.org/

brazzledazzle 11y ago
This conflict between Linus/kernel devs and systemd devs is pretty fascinating, I hadn't seen it before. Here's an example: http://lkml.iu.edu//hypermail/linux/kernel/1404.0/01331.html http://lkml.iu.edu//hypermail/linux/kernel/1404.0/01331.html https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=76935 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=76935
- moe 11y ago
  Well, it makes the whole adoption story even more irritating. Literally everyone with a clue in the matter seems to hate systemd with passion[1]. A long-term Debian Maintainer quit over the issue[2]. Linus himself (as you quoted) seems more than a little annoyed by systemd and its developer. And yet somehow systemd made its way into all major distros... [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/12/459 https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/12/459 [2] http://err.no/personal/blog/2014/Nov/16 http://err.no/personal/blog/2014/Nov/16
  - bkor 11y ago
    You're quoting a troll as reference for "anyone with a clue". Further, you're referencing that the systemd Debian maintainer quit on the harassment in the systemd discussion because he wanted systemd _in Debian_. Linus called out on some behaviour. That is not him saying that people should stop developing. It's him saying stop this behaviour.
    - moe 11y ago
      You're quoting a troll as reference Christopher Barry is most certainly not a troll. As shown in the LKML and Debian debates, the systemd infestation was firmly opposed by nearly everyone outside the 'vested interest' RedHat filter bubble. And still is. Some high profile names would be Eric S. Raymond or Patrick Volkerding (creator of Slackware). Debian has been forked over this; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devuan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devuan That is not him saying that people should stop developing. It's him saying stop this behaviour. It's him finally calling Kay Sievers out for being incompetent and an asshole. Which was long overdue. Sadly it's by far too late and will very likely not change a thing about systemd's "break and extinguish" strategy. Systemd will continue to break other peoples projects in its effort to replace every mature service implementation with a hacked up systemd imitation. At least until, hopefully, the major distros finally acknowledge their mistake and roll this disaster back.
- qznc 11y ago
  Indeed, that bug report is an interesting example. I can see both sides failing. 1. It was not a good bug report. 'Do not parse "debug" command line parameter' is not a bug. The actual bug is "assertion in systemd-journald" which is a clear regression, but independent of kernel parameters. According to comments 17 and 22, it was promptly fixed. 2. According to projects process, discussions about design are to be done on the mailinglist and not in the bug tracker. Most commenters violate this. 3. No systemd dev explained why they parse the debug parameter. 4. Sievers closed the bug report without explicitly acknowledging the assertion problem. 5. The kernel devs (especially Linus) are too hot headed and misread this. Systemd caused and fixed (!) the assertion problem.

by moe 11y ago

http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_systemd http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_... http://systemd-free.org/ http://systemd-free.org/

brazzledazzle 11y ago

This conflict between Linus/kernel devs and systemd devs is pretty fascinating, I hadn't seen it before. Here's an example: http://lkml.iu.edu//hypermail/linux/kernel/1404.0/01331.html http://lkml.iu.edu//hypermail/linux/kernel/1404.0/01331.html https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=76935 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=76935

moe 11y ago
Well, it makes the whole adoption story even more irritating. Literally everyone with a clue in the matter seems to hate systemd with passion[1]. A long-term Debian Maintainer quit over the issue[2]. Linus himself (as you quoted) seems more than a little annoyed by systemd and its developer. And yet somehow systemd made its way into all major distros... [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/12/459 https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/12/459 [2] http://err.no/personal/blog/2014/Nov/16 http://err.no/personal/blog/2014/Nov/16
- bkor 11y ago
  You're quoting a troll as reference for "anyone with a clue". Further, you're referencing that the systemd Debian maintainer quit on the harassment in the systemd discussion because he wanted systemd _in Debian_. Linus called out on some behaviour. That is not him saying that people should stop developing. It's him saying stop this behaviour.
  - moe 11y ago
    You're quoting a troll as reference Christopher Barry is most certainly not a troll. As shown in the LKML and Debian debates, the systemd infestation was firmly opposed by nearly everyone outside the 'vested interest' RedHat filter bubble. And still is. Some high profile names would be Eric S. Raymond or Patrick Volkerding (creator of Slackware). Debian has been forked over this; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devuan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devuan That is not him saying that people should stop developing. It's him saying stop this behaviour. It's him finally calling Kay Sievers out for being incompetent and an asshole. Which was long overdue. Sadly it's by far too late and will very likely not change a thing about systemd's "break and extinguish" strategy. Systemd will continue to break other peoples projects in its effort to replace every mature service implementation with a hacked up systemd imitation. At least until, hopefully, the major distros finally acknowledge their mistake and roll this disaster back.
qznc 11y ago
Indeed, that bug report is an interesting example. I can see both sides failing. 1. It was not a good bug report. 'Do not parse "debug" command line parameter' is not a bug. The actual bug is "assertion in systemd-journald" which is a clear regression, but independent of kernel parameters. According to comments 17 and 22, it was promptly fixed. 2. According to projects process, discussions about design are to be done on the mailinglist and not in the bug tracker. Most commenters violate this. 3. No systemd dev explained why they parse the debug parameter. 4. Sievers closed the bug report without explicitly acknowledging the assertion problem. 5. The kernel devs (especially Linus) are too hot headed and misread this. Systemd caused and fixed (!) the assertion problem.