SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I think you're taking my comments a little too seriously. It was a little humour, poking a little light fun at our scientists and their need to create the concepts of Dark [ matter | energy | flow | <insert wacky idea here> | etc..]. i.e. imaginary stuff that no one can actually see, or prove exists.
Given that people don't seem to be able to see this either, I think I must have stumbled upon Dark Humour!
(yes, another pun, but I'm starting to wonder why I even bother.)
One of the main goals of systemd is to unify basic Linux configurations and service behaviors across all distributions. Systemd project does not contain any distribution-specific parts. Distributions are expected to convert over time their individual configurations to the systemd format, or they will need to carry and maintain patches in their package if they still decide to stay different.
What does this mean for you? When developing with systemd, don't use any of the latter interfaces, or we will tell your mom, and she won't love you anymore. You are welcome to use the other interfaces listed here, but if you use any of the second kind (i.e. those where we don't yet make a stability promise), then make sure to subscribe to our mailing list, where we will announce API changes, and be prepared to update your program eventually.
Note that this is a promise, not an eternal guarantee. These are our intentions, but if in the future there are very good reasons to change or get rid of an interface we have listed above as stable, then we might take the liberty to do so, despite this promise. However, if we do this, then we'll do our best to provide a smooth and reasonably long transition phase.
Wait, did he just say that? Liberty, despite the promise! He's given his marching orders, let's see if Pat decides to "stay different". Maybe Red Hat is building a cool OS, and maybe some day I will want it but not in this decade. That's how far I think they are from stable and sane, and why I currently seek refuge with Slackware. Cheers!
P.S. Did anyone else see funny-systemd.gif? Ha ha! Keep the humor and ditch the animosity, happy hacking to all!
When developing with systemd, don't use any of the latter interfaces, or we will tell your mom, and she won't love you anymore.
As I stated before, I have no technical, or even political complaints about systemd itself. For all I know, it's the best implementation of the Windoze ideology, appreciated by a large market segment, and will be the bright future of many Linux distros. But I am continually amazed that anyone, anyone is still talking to LP. "Your mom", really? The sad thing, this no longer surprises me, as it is quite on par with other freedesktop documentation. Another nail in the coffin is this frightening video, where datenwolf dares to criticize Gnome. (If you haven't watched it, don't. You will want to cry.) My favorite part is when LP interrupts the presenter with "do you hate handicapped people?" Yes, of course. The guy is saying, GDM is inflexible and is a nightmare to configure for his workflow. Ergo, handicapped people can burn in hell.
I don't agree with everything Linus does, but he was absolutely right to declare anathema on LP. And the cherry on this cake is the complaint by LP about the "sick" free software community. The guy's jewels must be made of brass or something.
I think the real question still remains.
Is Slackware going to be effected by systemd or is it not?
Could it be that those that developed systemd force Pat's hand to except this? (it's possible)
Another possibility is that Slackware will greatly benefit by staying with sysvinit. If even a fraction of a percent of users of other distros choose to switch to Slackware to avoid systemd, it would mean a significant increase in Slackware's user base; hopefully with a commensurate adjustment to Slackware's revenue stream. And given the nature of the "controversy", the majority of such new users could be expected to be experienced and familiar with GNU/Linux and its development, adding to Slackware's already knowledgeable membership.
Another possibility is that Slackware will greatly benefit by staying with sysvinit. If even a fraction of a percent of users of other distros choose to switch to Slackware to avoid systemd, it would mean a significant increase in Slackware's user base; hopefully with a commensurate adjustment to Slackware's revenue stream. And given the nature of the "controversy", the majority of such new users could be expected to be experienced and familiar with GNU/Linux and its development, adding to Slackware's already knowledgeable membership.
Supply meeting demand would be a huge booster for Slackware. Not only would it push the project out more, it also would significantly stretch out the user base, and the amount of revenue coming in for Slackware would greatly increase which would help Slackware and Patrick both out tremendously.
I would also suspect this would fold into Slackbuilds.org equally, increasing the number of ports.
As far as Linus, I'm beginning to wonder if he's "falling asleep at the wheel" while GNU/Linux is turned into another Windows, OSX, or Solaris monolithic mess behind his back and in plain sight to the rest of us. The bazaar model of development allowed for so much success in GNU/Linux, while monolithic UNICES had slower development cycles and less development into support vectors.
As far as Linus, I'm beginning to wonder if he's "falling asleep at the wheel" while GNU/Linux is turned into another Windows, OSX, or Solaris monolithic mess behind his back and in plain sight to the rest of us. The bazaar model of development allowed for so much success in GNU/Linux, while monolithic UNICES had slower development cycles and less development into support vectors.
I'd like to think Linus is as keen as ever, but the project has simply outgrown him in a good way. Linux is just too big for one person to manage, so there are strata upon strata of bureaucracy to "help" Linus out. He no longer calls all the shots, and if he dares to stray too far from the hardware vendors, they will probably try to strike him out of the equation.
Take my personal gripes, for example: inclusion of non-free firmware and outdated license. His personal opinion may well be malleable on both points, but trying to fix the first will launch a vendor crusade, and the second one is simply intractable, and can be solved in practice only by changing the copyright law itself. IMHO, Linus is managing remarkably well in a very chaotic environment, and I especially approve of his emails where he goes ape$#!+ on developers who should know better. They really do get a point across.
Effectively he still has control of how Linux as a kernel is directed, but effectively he can say what goes in or out of the kernel.
The decision to allow non-free and/or incompatible licenses does benefit GNU/Linux by opening it up and allowing after-the-fact extras to contribute to compatibility.
However, he does maintain a responsibility to ensure the user-space is kept intact and works fluidly with the kernel-space likewise, otherwise nothing works. I think his decision to hold off on the inclusion of kdbus in favor of netlink proves that he knows the udev developers are willing to break the user-space on non-systemd systems just to push an agenda though, and saying no is beneficial to every camp, not just one. I just hope he doesn't turn a blind eye at the wrong time and kdbus go in and then netlink in udev be stuck out and every non-systemd system be forced into patchworks or systemd by hook or crook.
I just hope he doesn't turn a blind eye at the wrong time and kdbus go in and then netlink in udev be stuck out and every non-systemd system be forced into patchworks or systemd by hook or crook.
I just hope he doesn't turn a blind eye at the wrong time and kdbus go in and then netlink in udev be stuck out and every non-systemd system be forced into patchworks or systemd by hook or crook.
I think the Linux kernel could benefit greatly from a good IPC messaging system. TCP sockets don't provide very good security and Netlink requires root privileges* in order to set up an interprocess communications channel. I have not been tracking kdbus development very closely but from what little I've seen, the idea is technically sound.
* To my knowledge, anyway. If someone cares to point me towards how to do it otherwise, I would be very grateful.
Emacs is an incredible feat of human engineering. Going back to vi(m) now would be like going back to the Stone Age!
Yes yes, but back on topic - can Emacs run systemd?
Slightly more seriously, I'm following this thread because I'm agnostic towards systemd, but IF it turns out to be nothing but a Redmondisation device, then if Slackware sticks with a more Unix-natured init system, then I will probably help prove saulgoode 'right' and put on some Slacks. I've often thought about taking the plunge over the years, but never felt like I had the time.
Even if systemd turns out to be benign, I hope some distros will do without it. Otherwise what's the point of all this freedom?
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
Liberty, despite the promise! He's given his marching orders, let's see if Pat decides to "stay different". Maybe Red Hat is building a cool OS, and maybe some day I will want it but not in this decade. That's how far I think they are from stable and sane, and why I currently seek refuge with Slackware. Cheers!
