LinuxQuestions.org
Welcome to the most active Linux Forum on the web.
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 06-11-2013, 11:52 PM   #466
ReaperX7
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Distribution: LFS-SVN, FreeBSD 10.0
Posts: 3,276
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876

Errr... yeah... whatever...

So has anyone looked into porting RUnit, OpenRC, or S6 in to Slackware for testing yet?

Oh, and I found this:

http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Talk:Com...f_init_systems
 
Old 06-12-2013, 12:11 AM   #467
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 ReaperX7 View Post
So has anyone looked into porting RUnit, OpenRC, or S6 in to Slackware for testing yet?
I have played with OpenRC and was able to boot Slackware with it, but there were some quirks and I hadn't the time to look into it yet. Maybe you can try it, also.
 
Old 06-12-2013, 12:15 AM   #468
ReaperX7
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Distribution: LFS-SVN, FreeBSD 10.0
Posts: 3,276
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876
I've been eyeballing runit for about a day now. The documentation on it is very solid, almost easy to understand. I might give it a try first.
 
Old 06-12-2013, 08:39 AM   #469
jens
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: Belgium
Distribution: Debian, Slackware, Fedora
Posts: 1,194

Rep: Reputation: 159Reputation: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post
No need to be rude also...
True.
That did sound more hostile than intended (apologies for that).

What I meant:
Look at it's code and you'll see why that's wrong (most is optional).
 
Old 06-12-2013, 10:13 AM   #470
jens
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: Belgium
Distribution: Debian, Slackware, Fedora
Posts: 1,194

Rep: Reputation: 159Reputation: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Cranium View Post
Code:
# ldd /sbin/init | wc -l
3
#
Am I missing something?
Yes.
When compiled, systemd is divided in many binaries (not to be confused with distro packages).
Most of them are optional (ps: no offence, but this was mentioned at least twenty times in this anti-systemd thread before) .

Last edited by jens; 06-12-2013 at 12:27 PM.
 
Old 06-12-2013, 12:26 PM   #471
Erik_FL
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Boynton Beach, FL
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 797

Rep: Reputation: 247Reputation: 247Reputation: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by elvis4526 View Post
I stop working on this port because nobody seems to care about systemd in the Slackware community so when the port was working, I learned what I wanted to learn and I didn't see the point to continue any further since nobody was showing interest in this.
As a Slackware user I appreciate your efforts. Although I am dubious about systemd at the present time your success with it is encouraging. The lack of interest may be partly due to timing. A lot of us Slackware users are still nervous about all the recent changes because of KDE 4 and now facing the prospect of new boot loaders to support UEFI. At least in the case of Slackware, KDE will have a lot of impact on whether systemd is considered. If KDE requires systemd, then it is more likely to become a part of Slackware. If KDE doesn't work well with systemd then it is less likely to become a part of Slackware. I'm not saying that I necessarily like the KDE-centric nature of Slackware but that is the current situation.

If you remain enthusiastic about systemd then you may find a future opportunity to repeat your experiment. There is nothing to keep you from using systemd on your own with Slackware. Since Slackware does not push updates onto systems one can use a stable release and then expect it to keep working until the next stable release. Those stable releases are usually 6 months or more apart.

In the past I never bothered to take anything from Slackware "current" because the stable releases were perfectly usable for me. Lately I have updated KDE and the few packages required to use the current KDE.

I understand your frustration wanting to see something you value added to Slackware. I would like to see some things like multilib packages and dmraid added to Slackware. I don't always agree with those maintaining Slackware, but I feel that if they are doing the work, they should make the decisions. I do agree with the conservative approach of Slackware, and would rather wait for stable software than use the very newest software. One thing that I have learned is there will always be new software and there will always be new bugs.

Last edited by Erik_FL; 06-12-2013 at 12:27 PM.
 
Old 06-12-2013, 12:42 PM   #472
jens
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: Belgium
Distribution: Debian, Slackware, Fedora
Posts: 1,194

Rep: Reputation: 159Reputation: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik_FL View Post
I don't always agree with those maintaining Slackware, but I feel that if they are doing the work, they should make the decisions. I do agree with the conservative approach of Slackware, and would rather wait for stable software than use the very newest software.
True.
There's no reason to rush things.
If others are willing to help with a SlackBuild (I'm not really familiar with building them), I don't mind spending some extra time on that as well.

Last edited by jens; 06-12-2013 at 12:45 PM.
 
Old 06-12-2013, 04:23 PM   #473
ReaperX7
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Distribution: LFS-SVN, FreeBSD 10.0
Posts: 3,276
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876
If you've ever followed the "Requested Software to be Added to Slackware" topic you'll get a good idea of how minimal Slackware tries to be while keeping a fully working out-of-the-box system maintained. It's not easy because Slackware has grown so much.

Last edited by ReaperX7; 06-12-2013 at 04:31 PM.
 
Old 06-12-2013, 06:43 PM   #474
the3dfxdude
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Posts: 318

Rep: Reputation: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by jens View Post
Survey answers part 1: systemd has too many dependencies, or it is bloated, or it does too many things, or is too complex (2013-06-09)

The top concern shared by most people is:

systemd has too many dependencies, or it is bloated, or it does too many things, or is too complex

Now this concern actually has a lot of different facets, and I am trying to share my opinion on each of them.

http://people.debian.org/~stapelberg...emd-bloat.html

systemd’s dependencies and installation footprint

This page lists systemd 204’s dependencies and explains what they are used for. It is supposed to contain facts, not opinion. For the corresponding opinion blog post, see http://people.debian.org/~stapelberg...emd-bloat.html. In case you want to reproduce these findings, the .deb I used to gather data can be downloaded.

http://people.debian.org/~stapelberg...endencies.html

...from Michael Stapelberg’s Blog.

PS: ... and seriously, systemd is _very_ well documented.
If you don't understand it's code that's mostly your problem.
If I understand what Reaper was saying here, the dependencies he was asking about go opposite way. Your quotes don't address that.
 
Old 06-12-2013, 06:54 PM   #475
rkelsen
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 1,763

Rep: Reputation: 201Reputation: 201Reputation: 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post
So has anyone looked into porting RUnit, OpenRC, or S6 in to Slackware for testing yet?
What for?
 
3 members found this post helpful.
Old 06-12-2013, 07:01 PM   #476
Richard Cranium
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2009
Location: Carrollton, Texas
Distribution: Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 1,495

Rep: Reputation: 438Reputation: 438Reputation: 438Reputation: 438Reputation: 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by jens View Post
Yes.
When compiled, systemd is divided in many binaries (not to be confused with distro packages).
Most of them are optional (ps: no offence, but this was mentioned at least twenty times in this anti-systemd thread before) .
I see that you missed my point.
 
Old 06-12-2013, 07:23 PM   #477
astrogeek
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2008
Distribution: Slackware: 12.1, 13.1, 14.1, 64-14.1, -current, FreeBSD-10
Posts: 1,915

Rep: Reputation: 693Reputation: 693Reputation: 693Reputation: 693Reputation: 693Reputation: 693
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Cranium View Post
I see that you missed my point.
Yea I think he did.

Last edited by astrogeek; 06-12-2013 at 08:49 PM. Reason: Afterthoughts...
 
Old 06-12-2013, 08:28 PM   #478
ReaperX7
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Distribution: LFS-SVN, FreeBSD 10.0
Posts: 3,276
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkelsen View Post
What for?
Alternative to systemd if at all possible, or expansion of the SysVInit we use at the moment.
 
Old 06-12-2013, 10:09 PM   #479
rkelsen
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 1,763

Rep: Reputation: 201Reputation: 201Reputation: 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post
Alternative to systemd if at all possible, or expansion of the SysVInit we use at the moment.
Why do we need a 'bigger' init?

For which services is the current init not adequate?

Last edited by rkelsen; 06-12-2013 at 10:13 PM.
 
4 members found this post helpful.
Old 06-12-2013, 11:46 PM   #480
ReaperX7
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Distribution: LFS-SVN, FreeBSD 10.0
Posts: 3,276
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876Reputation: 876
I'm not saying our current Init is bad. In fact it's fine as it is, easy to use, understand, etc., but having some Optional stuff might be interesting to try out to increase SysVInit's functionality using RUnit or OpenRC.

I'm not advocating an outright replacement, and far from it. I'd rather create something, if I could, that was optional in every way and only enhanced what was already there.
 
  


Closed Thread

Tags
cgroups


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
LXer: Slackware: Is Systemd Inevitable? LXer Syndicated Linux News 5 07-22-2013 04:54 AM
[SOLVED] slackware and systemd fl0 Slackware 512 08-29-2012 11:07 AM
slackware and systemd (OT) eloi Slackware 44 08-24-2012 04:36 PM
[SOLVED] systemd and Slackware's future kikinovak Slackware 95 07-14-2012 11:40 AM
Boot Delay 30min: systemd-analyze blame systemd-tmpfiles-setup.service BGHolmes Fedora 0 07-27-2011 09:02 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:00 PM.

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