3 ms·

There isn't a single thing in the Linux ecosystem that is "stable". (And that's a good thing.)

by otabdeveloper4 2y ago

throw0101b 2y ago
> (And that's a good thing.) As someone who does not want to be paged at 03:14, I disagree.
- otabdeveloper4 2y ago
  "Stability" has nothing to do with reliability. "Stability" is the ossification of worst practices due to corporate dysfunction. Some of the least reliable systems are also 100 percent "stable".
blueflow 2y ago
How can you say its a good thing? I have 6 Laptops that cannot boot 6.0ff Linux due to kernel regressions. I'm running out of devices that can run Linux without crashing.
actionfromafar 2y ago
Isn't this quite the hot take? The situation is not that bad, at least in stable distributions like Debian. Systemd is taking over as an interface. It's almost to Linux what Win32 is to NTDLL. Linux is still there, but more and more you can't code against the kernel, you have to code against systemd.
- otabdeveloper4 2y ago
  Yes, and? I'm supposed to be outraged at a good thing finally happening to Linux?
  - AstralStorm 2y ago
    Where's the good thing? In making POSIX even more of a joke? In providing low quality "chase this API" target? In enforced obsolescence? Systemd does not provide stable APIs. For that, a standarization process is required and has not been followed. Or at least a conservative approach to API and ABI, like Linux kernel itself has. The whole thing is following a big ball of mud approach that has previously resulted in Linux distros having up to 5 sound APIs active at the same time. One of which is Lennart's work and getting obsolesced. (PulseAudio, much better written than systemd, by Pipewire. Because it cannot handle video and realtime.) To achieve its aims it has to be actually good, well written, have a working minimal core feature set and be version compatible. So far this has not happened for init.
    - otabdeveloper4 2y ago
      I don't want or need these kinds of "standards".

There isn't a single thing in the Linux ecosystem that is "stable". (And that's a good thing.)

throw0101b 2y ago

> (And that's a good thing.) As someone who does not want to be paged at 03:14, I disagree.

otabdeveloper4 2y ago
"Stability" has nothing to do with reliability. "Stability" is the ossification of worst practices due to corporate dysfunction. Some of the least reliable systems are also 100 percent "stable".

blueflow 2y ago

How can you say its a good thing? I have 6 Laptops that cannot boot 6.0ff Linux due to kernel regressions. I'm running out of devices that can run Linux without crashing.

actionfromafar 2y ago

Isn't this quite the hot take? The situation is not that bad, at least in stable distributions like Debian. Systemd is taking over as an interface. It's almost to Linux what Win32 is to NTDLL. Linux is still there, but more and more you can't code against the kernel, you have to code against systemd.

otabdeveloper4 2y ago
Yes, and? I'm supposed to be outraged at a good thing finally happening to Linux?
- AstralStorm 2y ago
  Where's the good thing? In making POSIX even more of a joke? In providing low quality "chase this API" target? In enforced obsolescence? Systemd does not provide stable APIs. For that, a standarization process is required and has not been followed. Or at least a conservative approach to API and ABI, like Linux kernel itself has. The whole thing is following a big ball of mud approach that has previously resulted in Linux distros having up to 5 sound APIs active at the same time. One of which is Lennart's work and getting obsolesced. (PulseAudio, much better written than systemd, by Pipewire. Because it cannot handle video and realtime.) To achieve its aims it has to be actually good, well written, have a working minimal core feature set and be version compatible. So far this has not happened for init.
  - otabdeveloper4 2y ago
    I don't want or need these kinds of "standards".