4 ms·

Regarding systemd, I'm not sure if majority wanted it. The fact that it heats the temperature means that it is not true, more like 50/50 are for/against.

by krzyk 5y ago

5e92cb50239222b 5y ago
https://lwn.net/Articles/585319/ https://lwn.net/Articles/585319/ I didn't follow this at all at the time and thought it was something like 90% for. Turns out, it was closer to 50/50: > The vote came down much as expected, with a 4:4 split between systemd and Upstart proponents. Anthony Towns analyzed the votes and declared a tie between systemd and Upstart, which left it up to the chairman to decide by using the casting vote. Garbee did just that, voting for systemd, which makes it the Debian Linux default init for jessie.
- secondaryacct 5y ago
  Thank God for that !
  - rektide 5y ago
    I'm very much in the "Thank God"-ish camp (if ya'll welcome others, non denominations & non-believers), but... wouldn't it be interesting if. It's convenient that we've consolidated down, but that famous freedom of choice seems to be circumscribed now by a ellipse with systemd at one focus point, and refusenik shell-script-only minimal pid1s at the other. Having a more active & ongoing paradigmatic discourse would have been interesting. So I kind of want a synopsis for upstart. These threads might provide some of that material. I'd touched upstart a couple times back so long ago, & the words "event-based" keep flashing before me, but I don't have much recall on upstart. What was it bad at? What didn't people like? What did people like? What was novel & interesting? What had potential but didn't quite work out? What was the best operational parts of it? There's so much tech in the world that doesn't quite make it, or which did make it & fell (CORBA), & we really need more Speakers For the Dead, people who can try to tell us the story of the tech earnestly, who can help us memorialize something by drawing together as much understanding, from as many points of view as they can.
    - teddyh 5y ago
      > I don't have much recall on upstart. What was it bad at? The author of systemd addresses this question in the original blog post which announced the systemd project (look under the heading “On Upstart”): http://0pointer.net/blog/projects/systemd http://0pointer.net/blog/projects/systemd
      - robocat 5y ago
        What a great summary! In my words: systemd works from a dependency graph, and upstart uses procedural events (dependencies implicit in code). Upstart is still used by ChromiumOS: https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/chromiumos-design-docs/boot-design https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/chromiumos-design-docs/...
throwawaymanbot 5y ago
I was for SystemD(isaster) initially. Then its "scope" turned in to a Poettering Vanity Project.

Regarding systemd, I'm not sure if majority wanted it. The fact that it heats the temperature means that it is not true, more like 50/50 are for/against.

by krzyk 5y ago

Regarding systemd, I'm not sure if majority wanted it. The fact that it heats the temperature means that it is not true, more like 50/50 are for/against.

5e92cb50239222b 5y ago

https://lwn.net/Articles/585319/ https://lwn.net/Articles/585319/ I didn't follow this at all at the time and thought it was something like 90% for. Turns out, it was closer to 50/50: > The vote came down much as expected, with a 4:4 split between systemd and Upstart proponents. Anthony Towns analyzed the votes and declared a tie between systemd and Upstart, which left it up to the chairman to decide by using the casting vote. Garbee did just that, voting for systemd, which makes it the Debian Linux default init for jessie.

secondaryacct 5y ago
Thank God for that !
- rektide 5y ago
  I'm very much in the "Thank God"-ish camp (if ya'll welcome others, non denominations & non-believers), but... wouldn't it be interesting if. It's convenient that we've consolidated down, but that famous freedom of choice seems to be circumscribed now by a ellipse with systemd at one focus point, and refusenik shell-script-only minimal pid1s at the other. Having a more active & ongoing paradigmatic discourse would have been interesting. So I kind of want a synopsis for upstart. These threads might provide some of that material. I'd touched upstart a couple times back so long ago, & the words "event-based" keep flashing before me, but I don't have much recall on upstart. What was it bad at? What didn't people like? What did people like? What was novel & interesting? What had potential but didn't quite work out? What was the best operational parts of it? There's so much tech in the world that doesn't quite make it, or which did make it & fell (CORBA), & we really need more Speakers For the Dead, people who can try to tell us the story of the tech earnestly, who can help us memorialize something by drawing together as much understanding, from as many points of view as they can.
  - teddyh 5y ago
    > I don't have much recall on upstart. What was it bad at? The author of systemd addresses this question in the original blog post which announced the systemd project (look under the heading “On Upstart”): http://0pointer.net/blog/projects/systemd http://0pointer.net/blog/projects/systemd
    - robocat 5y ago
      What a great summary! In my words: systemd works from a dependency graph, and upstart uses procedural events (dependencies implicit in code). Upstart is still used by ChromiumOS: https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/chromiumos-design-docs/boot-design https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/chromiumos-design-docs/...

throwawaymanbot 5y ago

I was for SystemD(isaster) initially. Then its "scope" turned in to a Poettering Vanity Project.