LinuxQuestions.org
Help answer threads with 0 replies.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices

Closed Thread
 
Search this Thread
Old 08-02-2011, 06:29 AM   #61
kikinovak
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2011
Location: Montpezat (South France)
Distribution: Slackware, Slackware64
Posts: 1,709

Rep: Reputation: 815Reputation: 815Reputation: 815Reputation: 815Reputation: 815Reputation: 815Reputation: 815

Quote:
Originally Posted by KnutBluetooth View Post
Do you have any other pavlovian sophisms in store ?
I do. "Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien", goes a french saying meaning something like "Better is the enemy of good".

A marketing specialist living and working about 2.000 years ago - say with a nice office here in Nmes (called "Nemausus" 2000 years ago), on the Voie Domitienne ("Via Domitia") - would have put an "OLD" sticker on every package he wanted to sell. "OLD" meant something like "proven, solid, reliable", whereas a product with a "NEW" sticker on it would have been suspicious to folks. "NEW" meant first of all "has-to-prove-its-worth".

For the same reasons, I've recently moved my company's (http://www.microlinux.fr) services from various distros to Slackware 13.37. Because I was sick of pointless innovations going nowhere and distributions reinventing the wheel every six months. I don't give a damn about the number of seconds needed to start and shutdown my servers or my workstations. It's what happens in between that matters.

For the more adventurous, maybe a different distro would be advisable, something on the lines of Fedora or Arch?
 
6 members found this post helpful.
Click here to see the post LQ members have rated as the most helpful post in this thread.
Old 08-02-2011, 07:07 AM   #62
KnutBluetooth
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Posts: 21

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
There is also a french word called "immobilisme" which refers to irrational opposition to change. And judging by the comments one can read in this thread most of the people who oppose systemd know nothing about it and are spreading FUD and outright falsehoods. I have up to now not read a single sound argument against systemd on technical grounds.

"Observe always that everything is the result of change, and get used to thinking that there is nothing Nature loves so well as to change existing forms and make new ones like them." Marcus Aurelius
 
0 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-02-2011, 07:14 AM   #63
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Main: Gentoo Others: What fits the task
Posts: 15,592
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnutBluetooth View Post
"Observe always that everything is the result of change, and get used to thinking that there is nothing Nature loves so well as to change existing forms and make new ones like them." Marcus Aurelius
He forgot to mention that after changing existing forms nature destroys 99,99% (or even more) of the changed things due to being unfit. Systemd has to prove first that it is fit. There is nothing wrong about change, as long as it is reasonable.
 
Old 08-02-2011, 07:25 AM   #64
KnutBluetooth
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Posts: 21

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
He forgot to mention that after changing existing forms nature destroys 99,99% (or even more) of the changed things due to being unfit. Systemd has to prove first that it is fit. There is nothing wrong about change, as long as it is reasonable.
Well that sounds reasonable. We'll indeed see how systemd fares on other distros. But anyway, about the "99,9% (or even more)" that's certainly not fact. That's according to the hobesian interpretation of Charles Darwin's observations which is promoted as fact in support of a widespread ideology.

Last edited by KnutBluetooth; 08-02-2011 at 07:27 AM.
 
0 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-02-2011, 07:36 AM   #65
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Main: Gentoo Others: What fits the task
Posts: 15,592
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnutBluetooth View Post
But anyway, about the "99,9% (or even more)" that's certainly not fact. That's according to the hobesian interpretation of Charles Darwin's observations which is promoted as fact in support of a widespread ideology.
You may be right, but I think you got the point.
 
Old 08-02-2011, 08:19 AM   #66
KnutBluetooth
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Posts: 21

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
You may be right, but I think you got the point.
Indeed.
 
0 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-02-2011, 09:21 AM   #67
Mark Pettit
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2008
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Distribution: Slackware 14.1 64 Multi-Lib
Posts: 434

Rep: Reputation: 137Reputation: 137
Ah - much nicer to see everything has cooled down a bit :-)
 
Old 08-05-2011, 05:34 AM   #68
iphigenie
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2009
Location: IDLE, UK
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 30

Rep: Reputation: 9
>> I have up to now not read a single sound argument against systemd on technical grounds.

I have been trying to read this thread to try to understand the fuss and the question. Not found many arguments against, but not all that many for either. What is the compelling advantage that makes it worth having to change everything and forcing many people to learn a new way? There has to be enough advantages.

It's a very common pattern in the free software/open source world: the race for the cool/new. It's quite normal since people are volunteers, and what they want to get out of that is probably to grapple with interesting, new things - things that challenge them, things that make them feel cool in the geek pecking order, or things that will add to the CV. Very visible in Gnome and KDE, for example.

It's not necessarily bad but it can be when combined with ignorance of history and lack of diversity in the experience, then enthusiasm can lead to a rush-to-make-the-same-mistakes and constant pendulum swings between models... I have managed enough web developers to recognise the pattern If something was tried and abandoned before, it doesn't mean it cannot work in the future, but it certainly means that the naive enthusiastic direct way won't work, not without a careful look at what was done and tried and how/why it worked or failed...

I can't figure out whether there's a solid clever idea here or a rush down an old dead end with a new vehicle
 
7 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-05-2011, 09:57 AM   #69
imitheos
Member
 
Registered: May 2005
Location: Greece
Posts: 374

Rep: Reputation: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnutBluetooth View Post
Maybe this ought to be read before ignorantly bashing systemd :

http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/why.html
Or maybe it was already read before the "bashing" began. The article is subjective in favor of systemd. He mentions a ton of features that systemd has and the alternatives don't. How many of them are critical and how many of them cannot be used now in sysvinit through some external program ?

Also, in the features list it mentions selinux,pam,luks,policykit,etc while it says "only libdbus and glibc/libcap" as systemd dependencies. Won't it need to link with the appropriate libs in order to have the above features ?

This isn't much of an argument but systemd also needs some specific kernel options enabled in order to work, while the alternatives don't. I for one don't enable AUTOFS4 when i compile my kernel. Of course, it won't hurt me to enable it, but sysvinit doesn't get in my way.

Anyway, the most important argument is the one made by Alien Bob. OpenSource is bigger than Linux. The same happened when HAL was deprecated and KDE/Xfce changed to udisks/upower that work only in Linux. Why not code in a way that other OSes can use it ? I know POSIX is far from perfect but at least it provides some guidelines for cross platform code.

And even if the code is 3 times more efficient than if it followed POSIX, does it matter ? It is a init system for $deity sake. Is it so important if it takes 2 more seconds to boot ?
 
3 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-05-2011, 08:44 PM   #70
KnutBluetooth
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Posts: 21

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by imitheos View Post
Or maybe it was already read before the "bashing" began. The article is subjective in favor of systemd. He mentions a ton of features that systemd has and the alternatives don't. How many of them are critical and how many of them cannot be used now in sysvinit through some external program ?

Also, in the features list it mentions selinux,pam,luks,policykit,etc while it says "only libdbus and glibc/libcap" as systemd dependencies. Won't it need to link with the appropriate libs in order to have the above features ?
Apparently you didn't read it, because you'd know that systemd has a modular design and that these are compile time optional dependencies. As far as critical features, being able to cleanly shutdown daemons without resorting to hacks like PID files is something that people have been waiting for for ages. Contrarily to sysvinit, systemd tracks processes it spawns and therefore always knows for sure if something is running or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by imitheos View Post
Anyway, the most important argument is the one made by Alien Bob. OpenSource is bigger than Linux. The same happened when HAL was deprecated and KDE/Xfce changed to udisks/upower that work only in Linux. Why not code in a way that other OSes can use it ? I know POSIX is far from perfect but at least it provides some guidelines for cross platform code.
Who cares about OS portability ? Except for people whose hobby is system administration and playing around with many OSes and greedy companies who prefer half-assed jobs/temporary work to cut on costs, I don't know of any. Everyone else just wants one OS that works as best as possible. OS portability is basically cattering to the lowest common denominator and therefore hinders progress and efficiency.

OS Portability in those low-level areas such as those systemd treads is complete utter nonsense. Systemd uses a good number of the latest features of the Linux kernel and therefore POSIX is far from being sufficient. Anyway, if you'd read about systemd you'd know Lennart Poettering advocates sharing interfaces with other OSes. That means that other OSes have to come up with their own init replacements (just as they already came up with different ways to handle /dev) which share interfaces with systemd (he is open to discuss these interfaces with other interrested parties) so that the rest of userland can just be pluggable on top of any init replacement anyones comes up with. It's nonsense to make something such as systemd portable because it needs to be very close to the kernel to work as it should. Thankfully, I haven't yet heard about someone crazy or ignorant enough to advocate making udev portable. Why should it be different with systemd ?

And besides, the portability argument not a technical argument but a religious one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by imitheos View Post
And even if the code is 3 times more efficient than if it followed POSIX, does it matter ? It is a init system for $deity sake. Is it so important if it takes 2 more seconds to boot ?
It's a great side benefit. The most important thing is that systemd doesn't become an #ifdef soup and therefore a PITA to maintain just to please OS portability zealots.

Last edited by KnutBluetooth; 08-05-2011 at 08:53 PM.
 
0 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-05-2011, 09:45 PM   #71
qweasd
Member
 
Registered: May 2010
Posts: 444

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by volkerdi View Post
Well, the problem with using shell scripts in the boot process is that it goes through a lot of PIDs, and it would be "less ugly" to arrive at a usable machine state with a PID in the hundreds, or lower. If everything has to break in order to achieve that, it seems like a good trade. Eventually all the broken stuff will be fixed, right?

I think that's the basic rationale. And maybe shave a few more seconds off boot time, but who boots much (or cares)? My servers and desktops remain on, and my laptops are usually on, suspended, or hibernated. I would prefer a reliable and well-understood boot system like the one we have.
Funny and true. Anyway, after reading a bit about service files, I can see yet another rationale. The fundamental problem with shell scripts is that they are so ugly, no software tool, GUI or otherwise, will dare to edit them. So where does that leave an administrator who would prefer to configure his services with a few mouse gestures? And more importantly, how can your package manager or DE hope to rewrite your entire start-up every time you pull updates? Or every time you change a system setting? Or every time it collects enough statistical information to make an inference about your mood? With systemd, the dream becomes reality.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-05-2011, 11:11 PM   #72
bonixavier
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2010
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 320

Rep: Reputation: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnutBluetooth View Post
Who cares about OS portability ? Except for people whose hobby is system administration and playing around with many OSes and greedy companies who prefer half-assed jobs/temporary work to cut on costs, I don't know of any.
Project maintainers should. Some deps have made (at least at the time it was launched) XFCE 4.8 a Linux only product. Programs relying heavily on Linux only stuff like udisks make it more difficult to port software to the BSDs for example.
Now, it should make sense to have a Linux init system to basically only care about Linux, right? Turns out that folks like the GNOME devs want to start making it dependent on systemd. Now, can you see how that would be a problem for people using other unices? Or are you not interested in them either?

Quote:
And besides, the portability argument not a technical argument but a religious one.
Technical matters aside (like inserting verbs in sentences), your attitude appears to be ideological. You happen to think systemd is a great idea. Fine. Trying to sell your fish while disregarding criticism and second thoughts as zealotry, obscurantism, fear of change, ignorance and the like is precisely what people who think they have all the answers do.
It strikes me as a bit surprising that someone who had never posted before turns a discussion into an argument and starts flaming who doesn't agree with him/her and intends to be taken seriously. I could use the same strategy you've been using, want to see?

Quote:
It's a great side benefit. The most important thing is that systemd doesn't become an #ifdef soup and therefore a PITA to maintain just to please OS portability zealots.
The most important thing about sysvinit is that it caters to stability, reliability and standards instead of reinventing the wheel to please lazy administrators who feel maintaining it is too much work.
That's not the way to have a productive discussion, is it?
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-06-2011, 12:33 AM   #73
KnutBluetooth
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Posts: 21

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonixavier View Post
Project maintainers should. Some deps have made (at least at the time it was launched) XFCE 4.8 a Linux only product. Programs relying heavily on Linux only stuff like udisks make it more difficult to port software to the BSDs for example.
And since *BSD is still in the stone age as far as infrastructure for hardware access and management, therefore Linux users have to have the lowest common denominator of functionality so that users of other OSes don't feel left out? As a Linux user am I going to have to wait another 10 years before we are allowed to have the functionality that even Windows 95 had because we have to wait for other unices to catch up (if they're even interrested in catching up in that area to begin with)?

Besides the truth is, those deps are optional, Xfce 4.8 runs fine on *BSD/whatever without the Linux-only functionality. You just won't have the trash and a few other things that require udev and consolekit. Don't complain to the Xfce/Linux devs, complain to the *BSD devs whose priority self-evidently is the server and not the desktop.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bonixavier View Post
Now, it should make sense to have a Linux init system to basically only care about Linux, right?
Yes, as I explained in the previous post it makes a lot of sense because in order to work properly an init system designed for desktop use has to be closely coupled with the kernel just like udev.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bonixavier View Post
Turns out that folks like the GNOME devs want to start making it dependent on systemd. Now, can you see how that would be a problem for people using other unices? Or are you not interested in them either?
Those people need to complain to the *BSD devs whose focus obviously is not the desktop.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bonixavier View Post
Technical matters aside (like inserting verbs in sentences), your attitude appears to be ideological. You happen to think systemd is a great idea. Fine. Trying to sell your fish while disregarding criticism and second thoughts as zealotry, obscurantism, fear of change, ignorance and the like is precisely what people who think they have all the answers do.
It strikes me as a bit surprising that someone who had never posted before turns a discussion into an argument and starts flaming who doesn't agree with him/her and intends to be taken seriously. I could use the same strategy you've been using, want to see?
It's highly annoying to have to read all sorts of falsehoods and twisting of facts about systemd.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bonixavier View Post
The most important thing about sysvinit is that it caters to stability, reliability and standards instead of reinventing the wheel to please lazy administrators who feel maintaining it is too much work.
That's not the way to have a productive discussion, is it?
As I've stated two times before, sysvinit can't reliably shut down processes. There is the BSD way of doing init scripts and the System V way. And among those two ways every other UNIX-like OS and Linux-distro has different incompatible init scripts. So I wonder which standard you are refering to. It's stability is that of mountains of shell soup spaghetty code just waiting for one syntax error to bring it all crashing down.

Oh and btw, sysvinit itself is not even portable to other unices as it requires glibc.

Last edited by KnutBluetooth; 08-06-2011 at 12:50 AM.
 
0 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-06-2011, 12:45 AM   #74
mRgOBLIN
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Jun 2002
Location: New Zealand
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 999

Rep: Reputation: 227Reputation: 227Reputation: 227
Let's just let this troll and his thread die a natural death.
 
3 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-06-2011, 12:56 AM   #75
KnutBluetooth
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Posts: 21

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by mRgOBLIN View Post
Let's just let this troll and his thread die a natural death.
Is it just me, or does anyone else see the irony in a goblin calling someone else a troll ^^
 
1 members found this post helpful.
  


Closed Thread


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
Informaton on systemd init system? arashi256 Linux - Newbie 1 06-04-2011 07:06 PM
LXer: openSUSE 11.4 M6 Kills HAL, Brings WebYaST, Avoids SystemD LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 01-28-2011 11:50 PM
LXer: This week at LWN: Systemd and Fedora 14 LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 09-07-2010 01:00 AM
LXer: Systemd Test Day on Tuesday 2010/09/07 LXer Syndicated Linux News 5 09-06-2010 10:52 AM
About Slackware 9.1 boot disk?? ftp://ftp.kpn.be/pub/linux/slackware/slackware-9.1-is AL3OMDAH Slackware 4 04-18-2007 09:54 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:31 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