4 ms·

> Even on systemd systems you can still install all your old tools and sidestep the systemd approach. That's not true. The overwhelming majority of people who

by ColanR 6y ago

> Even on systemd systems you can still install all your old tools and sidestep the systemd approach. That's not true. The overwhelming majority of people who want to avoid systemd have said this is not realistically possible. I have enjoyed my time without systemd because I switched distros. There's a reason why Devuan never took off, and Void Linux is gathering a following. Systemd has integrated itself too far. >> Here, Lennart explicity stated he was using non-overt methods to force cohesion in a non-organic fashion, which to me indicates he valued his design over good design. > I didn't get that at all, the post you linked explicitly mentioned discouraging distros that deviate from the base setup for senseless reasons. You talked right past what I said. Again, > it's their own job to disable our [mechanism] and plug in their own instead. Sooner or later they'll hopefully notice that it's not worth it and cross-distro unification is worth more. He's explicitly doing this for cross-distro unification, and he is intentionally forcing it through by making things difficult for distro maintainers.

cycloptic 6y ago
>That's not true. The overwhelming majority of people who want to avoid systemd have said this is not realistically possible. Can you please give examples? In my experience using your old init scripts, cron, syslogger, etc. with systemd still works fine. I did this for a long time on systemd machines until I felt comfortable with the systemd way. >he is intentionally forcing it through by making things difficult for distro maintainers You are talking past what Lennart said which you even quoted in your post just now: >they'll hopefully notice that it's not worth it and cross-distro unification is worth more I really cannot understand how you are trying to frame "hopefully they notice the associated costs with some decision" as anyone being forced to do anything. Are you trying to claim that systemd distros don't actually value cross-distro unification and were somehow tricked into this proposition even though it was clearly stated 10 years ago? Or are you disputing whether systemd actually accomplishes this? Either way, those are not really related to our current situation now.
- ColanR 6y ago
  > were somehow tricked into this proposition even though it was clearly stated 10 years ago? Tricked? Please don't put words into my mouth. You're right; technically, this email doesn't indicate he's forcing anyone. What it does say, though, is that he has his own agenda, and instead of trying to achieve consensus, he's intentionally making disagreement difficult while he forges ahead irrespective of that disagreement. To me, that represents disrespect for anyone who disagrees, and he's certainly not soliciting others' input. --- From reading some of the disagreements about systemd, it seems like there's two primary points of contention. 1. Whether or not systemd represents good engineering. For example, "it makes things super easy for sysadmins" vs. "it breaks things in weird ways", or "tight integration is awesome" vs. "muh Unix philosophy". 2. Whether or not systemd was introduced in good faith. Does that sound like a decent categorization? At the very least, it would help us not talk past each other.
  - cycloptic 6y ago
    I'm not putting words into your mouth. I asked if that was what you meant. It's reasonable for you to say no and then clarify. There is no such thing as a programmer without a personal agenda. You can cargo-cult the idea of "good engineering" and accuse people of making decisions in bad faith but it's weak in these circumstances when the ship sailed a long time ago and TFA already rants about enough related to this topic. Who cares? If you ask me nothing has changed, it's variations on the same old flame wars about Linux vs BSD vs Solaris vs MacOS vs everything else, just burning and burning, forever. Do you have an actual issue with the code that needs solving? I can actually help you with that, I can't help with trying to guess whether someone is an evil supervillain or not based on some ancient mailing list posts.
    - ColanR 6y ago
      I tried to find a common point of agreement. Thanks for calling it a cargo-cult. And why did you say everyone has a personal agenda? > accuse people of making decisions in bad faith but it's weak in these circumstances when the ship sailed a long time ago > I can't help with trying to guess whether someone is an evil supervillain or not based on some ancient mailing list posts. It was done in bad faith; you haven't denied that, and I don't like the idea of a primary programmer of one of the biggest pieces of open source OS software having a history of operating in bad faith. Do you? > it's variations on the same old flame wars about Linux vs BSD vs Solaris vs MacOS vs everything else, just burning and burning, forever Sounds like you're trying to discredit the whole argument without anwering it. > Do you have an actual issue with the code that needs solving? I can actually help you with that... Thanks; as you said, the ship has sailed and I don't do anything complicated with systemd distros anymore. The system is too complicated for me to work with. Any time something goes wrong, I have to search online for solutions, or ask for help. I would love to use gnome shell with an alternative, but it's not possible. Systemd hangs on shutdowns and startups: if you install ubuntu server while connected to the internet, then forever after if its not online during boot it will hang for 1:30 minutes (unless you google for the systemd incantation to solve it). On openbsd, I've rewritten the startup script to avoid mounting half the filesystem when I was doing a network boot - didn't have to do anything to figure it out, except watch the boot sequence and open the script. That would have been impossible in systemd. So no, I'm not talking about some cron job inconvenience. As TFA pointed out, there's a disconnect between "professional" linux and "enthusiast" linux. That disconnect can probably be attributed to the influence of Red Hat and systemd, and it means that I can't learn the OS anymore. It's completely opaque.

by ColanR 6y ago

cycloptic 6y ago

>That's not true. The overwhelming majority of people who want to avoid systemd have said this is not realistically possible. Can you please give examples? In my experience using your old init scripts, cron, syslogger, etc. with systemd still works fine. I did this for a long time on systemd machines until I felt comfortable with the systemd way. >he is intentionally forcing it through by making things difficult for distro maintainers You are talking past what Lennart said which you even quoted in your post just now: >they'll hopefully notice that it's not worth it and cross-distro unification is worth more I really cannot understand how you are trying to frame "hopefully they notice the associated costs with some decision" as anyone being forced to do anything. Are you trying to claim that systemd distros don't actually value cross-distro unification and were somehow tricked into this proposition even though it was clearly stated 10 years ago? Or are you disputing whether systemd actually accomplishes this? Either way, those are not really related to our current situation now.

ColanR 6y ago
> were somehow tricked into this proposition even though it was clearly stated 10 years ago? Tricked? Please don't put words into my mouth. You're right; technically, this email doesn't indicate he's forcing anyone. What it does say, though, is that he has his own agenda, and instead of trying to achieve consensus, he's intentionally making disagreement difficult while he forges ahead irrespective of that disagreement. To me, that represents disrespect for anyone who disagrees, and he's certainly not soliciting others' input. --- From reading some of the disagreements about systemd, it seems like there's two primary points of contention. 1. Whether or not systemd represents good engineering. For example, "it makes things super easy for sysadmins" vs. "it breaks things in weird ways", or "tight integration is awesome" vs. "muh Unix philosophy". 2. Whether or not systemd was introduced in good faith. Does that sound like a decent categorization? At the very least, it would help us not talk past each other.
- cycloptic 6y ago
  I'm not putting words into your mouth. I asked if that was what you meant. It's reasonable for you to say no and then clarify. There is no such thing as a programmer without a personal agenda. You can cargo-cult the idea of "good engineering" and accuse people of making decisions in bad faith but it's weak in these circumstances when the ship sailed a long time ago and TFA already rants about enough related to this topic. Who cares? If you ask me nothing has changed, it's variations on the same old flame wars about Linux vs BSD vs Solaris vs MacOS vs everything else, just burning and burning, forever. Do you have an actual issue with the code that needs solving? I can actually help you with that, I can't help with trying to guess whether someone is an evil supervillain or not based on some ancient mailing list posts.
  - ColanR 6y ago
    I tried to find a common point of agreement. Thanks for calling it a cargo-cult. And why did you say everyone has a personal agenda? > accuse people of making decisions in bad faith but it's weak in these circumstances when the ship sailed a long time ago > I can't help with trying to guess whether someone is an evil supervillain or not based on some ancient mailing list posts. It was done in bad faith; you haven't denied that, and I don't like the idea of a primary programmer of one of the biggest pieces of open source OS software having a history of operating in bad faith. Do you? > it's variations on the same old flame wars about Linux vs BSD vs Solaris vs MacOS vs everything else, just burning and burning, forever Sounds like you're trying to discredit the whole argument without anwering it. > Do you have an actual issue with the code that needs solving? I can actually help you with that... Thanks; as you said, the ship has sailed and I don't do anything complicated with systemd distros anymore. The system is too complicated for me to work with. Any time something goes wrong, I have to search online for solutions, or ask for help. I would love to use gnome shell with an alternative, but it's not possible. Systemd hangs on shutdowns and startups: if you install ubuntu server while connected to the internet, then forever after if its not online during boot it will hang for 1:30 minutes (unless you google for the systemd incantation to solve it). On openbsd, I've rewritten the startup script to avoid mounting half the filesystem when I was doing a network boot - didn't have to do anything to figure it out, except watch the boot sequence and open the script. That would have been impossible in systemd. So no, I'm not talking about some cron job inconvenience. As TFA pointed out, there's a disconnect between "professional" linux and "enthusiast" linux. That disconnect can probably be attributed to the influence of Red Hat and systemd, and it means that I can't learn the OS anymore. It's completely opaque.