LinuxQuestions.org
Support LQ: Use code LQ3 and save $3 on Domain Registration
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 05-12-2013, 02:41 AM   #91
kooru
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2012
Location: Italy
Distribution: Slackware, NetBSD
Posts: 1,307
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 260Reputation: 260Reputation: 260

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik_FL View Post
One of the dangers of systemd is that it may become a distraction from the real issues driving the success or failure of distros. If and when KDE requires systemd, then I think the issue becomes important, and the same is true of the other DEs that Slackware may consider important to its success.
The server world may have totally different issues. There, the DE is less important and systemd could become a requirement for some services. If software developers are smart, they will avoid making services depend on systemd. Slackware could actually distinguish itself by being a reliable distro that does not use systemd. Not only would that provide system administrators an alternative to systemd, it would provide developers of services a way to test their software on an OS without systemd.
I quote only this part but agree on all your post
 
Old 05-12-2013, 04:29 AM   #92
edorig
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2013
Location: France
Distribution: Slackware; Scientific Linux
Posts: 106

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Concerning the issue of Desktop Environments, it is true that if major DEs start requiring systemd, it would
become very problematic, not only for Slackware but also for all the BSDs. The solutions would be either (1) to
return to the lighter window managers (twm, mwm,fvwm2, blackbox, WindowMaker...) and maybe complement them with
a filemanager application or (2) start exploring the alternative DEs. I believe that (1) could be fine for server
applications, but not sufficient for a personal workstation. For (2), the alternative DEs would be Maté, XFCE, LXDE, CDE and GNUStep. It is likely that CDE and GNUStep are not going to become systemd dependent since that would kill
their portability to Unix environments. Both CDE and GNUStep are reasonably easy to build on Slackware, but CDE
has a very austere look while GNUStep seems to be lacking developers. What is the situation with XFCE or LXDE ?
Are their developers considering making their DEs systemd dependent ? For Maté, it is based on GNOME 2, so the
systemd dependencies will not be an issue for now. But in the long run, Maté may suffer from a lack of developers
and be unable to keep pace with the other DEs.
 
Old 05-12-2013, 07:52 AM   #93
Martinus2u
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2010
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 345

Rep: Reputation: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik_FL View Post
Commercial applications need standardization.
It is not the commercial aspect that creates the obsession with standardization, it is corporatocracy. It is a consequence of Conway's Law*, applied not only to software development and maintenance but also to software integration and adoption. It is this fundamental incompatibility with libertarian aspects of Open Source (and dare I say the dirty word, Free Software) development that gives Open Source such a hard time in the corporate environment.

* For reference, Conway's Law as defined in the Jargon File:

Quote:
Conway's Law: prov.

The rule that the organization of the software and the organization of the software team will be congruent; commonly stated as “If you have four groups working on a compiler, you'll get a 4-pass compiler”. The original statement was more general, “Organizations which design systems are constrained to produce designs which are copies of the communication structures of these organizations.” This first appeared in the April 1968 issue of Datamation. Compare SNAFU principle.

The law was named after Melvin Conway, an early proto-hacker who wrote an assembler for the Burroughs 220 called SAVE. (The name ‘SAVE’ didn't stand for anything; it was just that you lost fewer card decks and listings because they all had SAVE written on them.) [...]
http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/C/Conways-Law.html

Something unrelated but relevant to some readers: the entry about Conway's Law links to the SNAFU principle, which in turn links to Discordianism, which links to the Church of the Subgenius, which links to Slack.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-12-2013, 10:40 AM   #94
jens
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: Belgium
Distribution: Debian, Slackware, Fedora
Posts: 1,193

Rep: Reputation: 159Reputation: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martinus2u View Post
It is not the commercial aspect that creates the obsession with standardization, it is corporatocracy.
Linux isn't (and never was) about choice in the first place.
Upstream made it pretty clear that they do prefer more "standardization" on the base system.

Is Linux about choice (taken from Greg's G+ post):
http://www.islinuxaboutchoice.com/

https://plus.google.com/u/0/11104916...ts/RQ3Cf6dfUER

Last edited by jens; 05-12-2013 at 10:50 AM.
 
Old 05-12-2013, 04:44 PM   #95
jtsn
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2011
Location: Europe
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 803

Rep: Reputation: 354Reputation: 354Reputation: 354Reputation: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by jens View Post
Linux isn't (and never was) about choice in the first place.
Well, then I just take the code, remove the word "Linux" from it and then I set my own agenda.

If it is still compatible with Linux binaries and hardware, I see no problem.

BTW: As long as Android and Ubuntu don't adopt systemd, it is mostly irrelevant for the end-user, like the complete "FreeDesktop" project is (as the mainstream desktop/tablet platform isn't using it).

Last edited by jtsn; 05-12-2013 at 04:48 PM.
 
Old 05-13-2013, 02:03 AM   #96
ReaperX7
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Distribution: LFS-SVN, FreeBSD 10.0, CRUX 3.1
Posts: 3,052
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 768Reputation: 768Reputation: 768Reputation: 768Reputation: 768Reputation: 768Reputation: 768
If a Linux Regulator Board was created of 12 people, Red Hat could appoint someone, but equally so could Gentoo, Debian, and even Slackware, and others as well from key projects, and even LFS. All 1 person would have to do is say "NO" to a bad idea and the idea dies.

This means even if Lennart Poeterring was on the committee and wanted systemd as a core feature of Linux, Patrick or even Eric could over-ride with a "NO" vote and systemd's forced inclusion is immediately killed. This would cause some problems like stagnation in the beginning, but that's only short-term. Eventually an all "yes" vote would have to be given to reasonable software like as an exmaple, manditory updates to sysvinit as the default standardization of a UNIX Init but with modernizations.
 
Old 05-13-2013, 02:50 AM   #97
zakame
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2012
Distribution: Debian, Ubuntu, Slackware
Posts: 121

Rep: Reputation: 42
Good thing there's no Linux Regulatory Board. Design by committee please.
 
4 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-13-2013, 03:24 AM   #98
astrogeek
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2008
Distribution: Slackware: 12.1, 13.1, 14.1, 64-14.1, -current, FreeBSD-10
Posts: 1,770

Rep: Reputation: 601Reputation: 601Reputation: 601Reputation: 601Reputation: 601Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post
If a Linux Regulator Board was created of 12 people...
You have far more confidence in the group mind than I do!

As painful and unlikely as it may be, I think the best regulatior is still the fork. If systemd is as bad an idea as it appears, and I think it will turn out to be, and if it makes use of SYS5Init no longer possible (lots of ifs), a significant subset of Linux users/developers/thinkers will make the break. It may be fast, or it may be slow and messy. It may be an out-right fork, or just a decision point to go a different way. But I think this could very well be the thing that provokes the event, if it continues as it is going.

I think it would be terrific if systemd continued to be the source of confusion and strife, and Pat emerged as the voice crying in the wilderness - "Let my people go - the Unix way!". I think that among the possible outcomes, that one would be very cool!
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-13-2013, 03:28 AM   #99
Richard Cranium
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2009
Location: Carrollton, Texas
Distribution: Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 1,482

Rep: Reputation: 420Reputation: 420Reputation: 420Reputation: 420Reputation: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martinus2u View Post
It is not the commercial aspect that creates the obsession with standardization, it is corporatocracy.
Oh, good grief.

The more companies that use Red Hat on their IT servers, the more useful it is to be able to put "I know how to maintain Red Hat systems" in your resume. The more people that put "I know how to maintain Red Hat systems" in their resume means that companies don't have to train their asses on how to maintain a Red Hat system.

Tack on the fact that companies which pay for support more often than not provide feedback about the stuff that they'd like to see and you get a preference cascade. The more companies that jump on the Red Hat bandwagon, the more valuable it is to be on the bandwagon with everyone else.

I see it in my Day Job(TM) every day.

Mind you, I'm more often than not able to help Centos/RedHat users with issues since I know what's going on from being a Slackware user. However, putting Slackware on your resume won't get it past the Human Resources nitwit who is a biological "grep" engine searching resumes for matches with "Red Hat" or "Centos".
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-13-2013, 10:09 AM   #100
kikinovak
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2011
Location: Montpezat (South France)
Distribution: ElementaryOS, Ubuntu LTS, Slackware
Posts: 1,549

Rep: Reputation: 721Reputation: 721Reputation: 721Reputation: 721Reputation: 721Reputation: 721Reputation: 721
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitest View Post
Agreed. I'm a huge fan of the DE/WMs included with Slackware, but I think another DE would be a welcome addition to Slackware. I really like the work that chess and willysr are doing with MATE. Just a thought.
+1 on that.
 
Old 05-13-2013, 12:56 PM   #101
Martinus2u
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2010
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 345

Rep: Reputation: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Cranium View Post
Oh, good grief.
NP. I just don't understand why you say good grief and then go on to give an additional angle to the statement you quoted, thus supporting it.
 
Old 05-13-2013, 03:09 PM   #102
ReaperX7
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Distribution: LFS-SVN, FreeBSD 10.0, CRUX 3.1
Posts: 3,052
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 768Reputation: 768Reputation: 768Reputation: 768Reputation: 768Reputation: 768Reputation: 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by astrogeek View Post
You have far more confidence in the group mind than I do!

As painful and unlikely as it may be, I think the best regulatior is still the fork. If systemd is as bad an idea as it appears, and I think it will turn out to be, and if it makes use of SYS5Init no longer possible (lots of ifs), a significant subset of Linux users/developers/thinkers will make the break. It may be fast, or it may be slow and messy. It may be an out-right fork, or just a decision point to go a different way. But I think this could very well be the thing that provokes the event, if it continues as it is going.

I think it would be terrific if systemd continued to be the source of confusion and strife, and Pat emerged as the voice crying in the wilderness - "Let my people go - the Unix way!". I think that among the possible outcomes, that one would be very cool!
This could be the straw that breaks the camel's back, so to speak. If distributions start mitigating and pushing out systemd to the corporate world without the aspect of keeping it optional, this could in effect create a backlash wave against it's adoption, very similar to the sentiments the corporate world shunned Windows Vista in favor of Windows XP.

System's administrators often like to keep familiar software around, and using a system that doesn't go playing around with every new thing software wise, but used tools that not only are quick to edit, be easy to use also. In the Corporate IT world, only tried and true software gets used. Everything else is too risky for a mission critical system to chance things on.

Remember, Slackware, even if only on LinuxQuestions, got voted the most popular distribution, but not in other distribution type categories like server and such. However, this does have a lot of implications, and shows that even the oldest distribution to date, still matters greatly with admins and users alike due to the simplistic nature.

We may have to break some molds like using HotPlug2, mdev, and such to keep anything systemd related put out to pasture, however, where this is a will, there is a way, but only time will tell if we can keep systemd out forever.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-13-2013, 10:16 PM   #103
Richard Cranium
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2009
Location: Carrollton, Texas
Distribution: Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 1,482

Rep: Reputation: 420Reputation: 420Reputation: 420Reputation: 420Reputation: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martinus2u View Post
NP. I just don't understand why you say good grief and then go on to give an additional angle to the statement you quoted, thus supporting it.
"corporatocracy"

Heaven forbid that you'd use words that actually exist.
 
Old 05-13-2013, 11:47 PM   #104
ReaperX7
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Distribution: LFS-SVN, FreeBSD 10.0, CRUX 3.1
Posts: 3,052
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 768Reputation: 768Reputation: 768Reputation: 768Reputation: 768Reputation: 768Reputation: 768
I think after a few years, we'll start to see the craze surrounding systemd die off and a return to sanity like SysVInit, BSDInit, and OpenRC, as systemd proves to be pointless as the power user distributions like Gentoo, Slackware, etc. keep traditional Init systems avoiding the mess created by systemd and maybe even withdraw from udev as well.

Gnome has already pulled out any support for systemd, and I expect that KDE, Xfce, Trinity, and LXDE won't be adding support either.

Already udev itself has it's own problems that are being addressed by projects like eudev, hotplug2, and mdev and using systemd has it's problems also that really are questionable for a server environment that are making server admins keep sysvinit around more.

It's like that one random weird flavor of ice cream that comes out of Ben and Jerry's every other year or so. Everyone wants it, everyone wants to try it out, but in the end, they all go back to the flavors they like. PulseAudio was another one. At first people liked it, used it, then after they found out it broke everything, they dumped it and went back to dmix and esound.

It's safe to say Lennart Poeterring is digging his own grave with all the bad and questionable software he writes and releases. People can only stomach so much of bad software before the developer ends up in obscurity and dismissed forever.

Last edited by ReaperX7; 05-13-2013 at 11:49 PM.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 05-14-2013, 12:42 AM   #105
kikinovak
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2011
Location: Montpezat (South France)
Distribution: ElementaryOS, Ubuntu LTS, Slackware
Posts: 1,549

Rep: Reputation: 721Reputation: 721Reputation: 721Reputation: 721Reputation: 721Reputation: 721Reputation: 721
There's no need to panic, folks. Systemd is surely but safely making its way into Linux, and there's no way to stop that. I'm not sure about the details, but I can imagine how it will go.

All rc-files in /etc/rc.d will be replaced by one single binary executable rc.poettering file.

Runlevel info will be provided by /etc/lennarttab which comes as a replacement for /etc/inittab.

From there, everything between runlevel 0 (shutdown) and runlevel 58 (reboot) will be taken care of automagically.

Runlevel 42, for example, surveys zombie HTTPD processes, and once these reach a critical level, rc.poettering takes care of restarting all GNOME and Pulseaudio processes (henceforth mandatory for the system core).

I'm sure Patrick Volkerding will make all this fit nicely into Slackware.


Last edited by kikinovak; 05-14-2013 at 12:43 AM.
 
7 members found this post helpful.
  


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 10:10 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