LinuxQuestions.org
Download your favorite Linux distribution at LQ ISO.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 11-06-2013, 02:17 PM   #46
Daedalos
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2013
Location: Kansas
Distribution: Slackware 14.1 64bit Multi-lib
Posts: 22

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: Disabled

Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
Yes, that is what I meant, sorry for using the wrong word.

There is no general consensus on systemd and people feel different about it. There are strong opponents as well as strong proponents of systemd. But anyways, that is exactly what I meant withAs fatalfrrog pointed out, your sentence as well as this sentence from youindicates that your knowledge about systemd and other init systems is rather limited. That is why I said

Regarding this:I never said that threads about systemd are not allowed, but, as you may have discovered, this topic was discussed very widely in different threads already and there simply isn't a need for another one. Even the Slackware BDFL asks people not to start one more of these threads, so maybe we should go with his advice. Also, if you feel that my post is overly aggressive just report it, so that other moderators will look at it.

I am not a moderator for the Slackware sub-forum, so I can't close this thread. But even if I could I wouldn't close it, threads on LQ are only closed if there are serious violations of the LQ Rules, which is not the case here.
I understand that. Originally I never mean't for this thread to explode into the big ball of flames that it did.

I just wanted to try to start ideas or opinions on what a competitive solution
could be to systemd.

The responses that followed pretty much said that there is nothing wrong
with Sys V so why change it?

Therefore it is frustrating to have non consensus in any area of this issue.

People who think SysV is perfect and systemd is a pointless usurpation.

People who think SysV is not perfect and systemd is the solution.

& Then on both sides

Loyalists to both causes for their effects they could have on how they enjoy Slackware/GNULinux.


I didnt come here to argue.

I just wanted people who disagreed with systemd to talk about alternatives (ReaperX7 having the best responses yet in the thread).

Instead of what has already happened in this thread, and other threads regarding systemd.


I understand why you said what you said now. Sorry for the trouble.

Last edited by Daedalos; 11-06-2013 at 02:23 PM.
 
Old 11-06-2013, 03:52 PM   #47
ReaperX7
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Distribution: LFS-SVN, FreeBSD 10.0
Posts: 3,206
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828
Actually no init system will ever be truly perfect.

RunIt, systemd, OpenRC, sysvinit, and bsdinit, as well as every other init system out there will all have their shortfalls. They always have and always will, but systemd is a init that's trying to perform the equivalent feet of killing a squirrel with a bazooka.

A true future-proof init needs to be expandable which sysvinit and bsdinit both offer and accept into each other. Slackware's BSDInit implementation accepts both itself and sysvinit, and can further be expanded if you really want to do so. If you wanted you could add in daemontools, RunIt, s6, or any other service management and supervisory toolkit, then find a way to add in tree-dependency loading of services in parallel, and you'd have a equivalency to systemd for less than half the system overhead and bloatware costs.

The only problem is, OpenRC has already done this. OpenRC can be grafted into sysvinit and bsdinit without usurping them, and uses existing libraries and toolkits to manage services as they should be managed, in a modular form. OpenRC has been arpund a lot longer than systemd has, and does the same workload and more.

The only difference between systemd and OpenRC's acceptance is Lennart has major backing (developmentally and financially) by Red Hat and through Red Hat's pressuring of software developers for Linux it has a wider range of people willing to drink the Jim Jones kool-aid, and OpenRC was a project done by Gentoo... do the math and you see who controls the future of Linux, and possibly what is to come.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 11-06-2013, 04:00 PM   #48
Daedalos
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2013
Location: Kansas
Distribution: Slackware 14.1 64bit Multi-lib
Posts: 22

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Deleted by poster.

Last edited by Daedalos; 11-06-2013 at 04:16 PM.
 
Old 11-06-2013, 05:58 PM   #49
Ongbuntu
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2013
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 79

Rep: Reputation: 8
By the very statement that if one is not well informed he shouldn't talk about it, no threads should be started in any ways on any forums. Most asked out of ignorance or lack of knowledge. And the whole point is to learn from those who know more. Just saying...

Last edited by Ongbuntu; 11-06-2013 at 06:00 PM.
 
Old 11-06-2013, 09:13 PM   #50
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Main: Gentoo Others: What fits the task
Posts: 15,592
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4046Reputation: 4046Reputation: 4046Reputation: 4046Reputation: 4046Reputation: 4046Reputation: 4046Reputation: 4046Reputation: 4046Reputation: 4046Reputation: 4046
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ongbuntu View Post
By the very statement that if one is not well informed he shouldn't talk about it, no threads should be started in any ways on any forums.
Oh, come on, there is a difference between threads where somebody needs help and threads meant to discuss a topic and I am fairly sure you know that. If you have to ask something it is obvious that you don't have the knowledge and need help. But if you open a thread meant for discussion you should have at least some basic knowledge about the topic. You also wouldn't open a thread on a car forum and discuss engines when you have no knowledge about engines.
Quote:
And the whole point is to learn from those who know more. Just saying...
Of course it is. Learning about a software starts by going to the developers site and read the documentation.
 
Old 11-06-2013, 09:34 PM   #51
ReaperX7
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Distribution: LFS-SVN, FreeBSD 10.0
Posts: 3,206
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828
There's no such thing as a stupid question... just a stupid answer.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 11-06-2013, 09:39 PM   #52
Richard Cranium
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2009
Location: Carrollton, Texas
Distribution: Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 1,494

Rep: Reputation: 437Reputation: 437Reputation: 437Reputation: 437Reputation: 437
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post
There's no such thing as a stupid question... just a stupid answer.
Well, I can see that you've never been a platoon leader.
 
Old 11-06-2013, 09:41 PM   #53
ReaperX7
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Distribution: LFS-SVN, FreeBSD 10.0
Posts: 3,206
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828
It's just those bloody stupid answers Richard... repeating them again, and again, and again...
 
Old 11-06-2013, 09:45 PM   #54
Richard Cranium
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2009
Location: Carrollton, Texas
Distribution: Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 1,494

Rep: Reputation: 437Reputation: 437Reputation: 437Reputation: 437Reputation: 437
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daedalos View Post
Then why are distros drinking the systemd Kool-Aid?
Because it's the de facto standard. And it's the de facto standard, because they are drinking the Kool-Aid.
 
Old 11-06-2013, 09:48 PM   #55
ReaperX7
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Distribution: LFS-SVN, FreeBSD 10.0
Posts: 3,206
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828Reputation: 828
It's not the true de-facto standard. It's the Red Hat de-facto standard rammed down your throat claiming to be the true de-facto standard.

I feel like The Doctor trying to explain this in metaphor and soliloquy and maintaining sanity within the insanity of things.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 11-06-2013, 10:06 PM   #56
Richard Cranium
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2009
Location: Carrollton, Texas
Distribution: Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 1,494

Rep: Reputation: 437Reputation: 437Reputation: 437Reputation: 437Reputation: 437
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatalfrrog View Post
You can see it here. There is very clearly a section titled "Why Debian should default to systemd". I suggest you start there.
I have looked at that document. Since it was written by people that really, really want systemd to be adopted by Debian, I can believe that they'd pull some parc out of their ttub. But when someone writes...
Quote:
Debugging an init script is a tedious task.
...it's rather difficult to take anything following seriously.

Look, I get the drive behind a unified thingy starter. Certainly, the things that we want to start when we plug in a device are more similar than not than the things that we find when we start running which are more similar than not than the things we want to run when someone contacts us on a certain port.

Unless, perhaps, that isn't exactly the case.

To a large extent, the direction that systemd is moving towards is similar to the direction that Gnome is taking. And I haven't agreed with that direction since Gnome 2.x.

I trust Pat's views on the matter. He's "resisted" PAM for over a decade. If he decides that we must start using systemd, well, then I'll use it until/unless it bugs me enough to move to another distro.

Until Slackware uses systemd, I'm not gonna worry about it. Other than dealing with the goofball RedHat systems that I deal with in the Day Job (TM). [Kickstart was written by frigging lunatics.]
 
Old 11-06-2013, 10:09 PM   #57
Richard Cranium
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2009
Location: Carrollton, Texas
Distribution: Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 1,494

Rep: Reputation: 437Reputation: 437Reputation: 437Reputation: 437Reputation: 437
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post
It's not the true de-facto standard. It's the Red Hat de-facto standard rammed down your throat claiming to be the true de-facto standard.

I feel like The Doctor trying to explain this in metaphor and soliloquy and maintaining sanity within the insanity of things.
*sigh* I see that you missed the joke.

The story of my life, indeed.
 
Old 11-06-2013, 10:34 PM   #58
Ongbuntu
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2013
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 79

Rep: Reputation: 8
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
Oh, come on, there is a difference between threads where somebody needs help and threads meant to discuss a topic and I am fairly sure you know that. If you have to ask something it is obvious that you don't have the knowledge and need help. But if you open a thread meant for discussion you should have at least some basic knowledge about the topic. You also wouldn't open a thread on a car forum and discuss engines when you have no knowledge about engines.Of course it is. Learning about a software starts by going to the developers site and read the documentation.
Yes. And i accept your point. What im trying to say is that one shouldn't need to b a subject matter expert in order to voice his/her views.

To quote an example, i offen find that there is something to take away even from different threads asking the same question. Anyway, it's not intended to b personal. Or maybe im just saying it because im guilty of ask

---------- Post added 11-07-13 at 05:35 AM ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
Oh, come on, there is a difference between threads where somebody needs help and threads meant to discuss a topic and I am fairly sure you know that. If you have to ask something it is obvious that you don't have the knowledge and need help. But if you open a thread meant for discussion you should have at least some basic knowledge about the topic. You also wouldn't open a thread on a car forum and discuss engines when you have no knowledge about engines.Of course it is. Learning about a software starts by going to the developers site and read the documentation.
Yes. And i accept your point. What im trying to say is that one shouldn't need to b a subject matter expert in order to voice his/her views.

To quote an example, i offen find that there is something to take away even from different threads asking the same question. Anyway, it's not intended to b personal. Or maybe im just saying it because im guilty of asking stupid questions at times
 
Old 11-06-2013, 11:29 PM   #59
jtsn
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2011
Location: Europe
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 803

Rep: Reputation: 354Reputation: 354Reputation: 354Reputation: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoMetal View Post
"Systemd is moving strongly in the direction of configuration-less system (i.e. “empty /etc/”). So /etc/fstab might be empty on a system with a GPT partition table, with partitions mounted in appropriate places based on their type id. This means that the configuration of the common one-machine-one-disk setup becomes even simpler."
No, that is not configuration-less, it is just configuration by patching the source code. The dream of a C programmer...
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 11-11-2013, 07:04 AM   #60
Pixxt
Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Distribution: Slackware, Debian,
Posts: 103

Rep: Reputation: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by solarfields View Post
Super duper.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Debian To Replace SysVinit, Switch To Systemd Or Upstart jeremy Linux - News 0 10-28-2013 02:03 PM
SysVinit vs OpenRC vs systemd vs other init system cristi92b Linux - Newbie 2 01-07-2013 03:02 AM
What are the advantages/disadvantages of using systemd versus sysvinit? ReaperX7 Linux - General 11 10-22-2012 10:22 AM
LXer: Debian testing a systemd-to-sysvinit converter LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 08-20-2012 05:20 PM
[SOLVED] Timeout of mount /home directory during boot (systemd and sysvinit) JZL240I-U Linux - Software 3 12-22-2011 11:02 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:48 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration