Quote:
As you might know both gnome and kde and more DE's are leaning towards making systemd a hard dependecy. because of this, Dropline Gnome start developing next to their standard gnome release a systemd part. This is all still in development, and we do not declare it as release for the time being. That being said, there are some thing to know about systemd on slackware. 1. some packages needs to be reinstalled because systemd ships with udev.so.1, while slackware is still udev.so.0 2. even tho in our systemd package we make a symlink between those 2 libs, rebuilds of the other packages have been made. https://sourceforge.net/p/dropline-g...s/dlg_current/ at the above link you can browse the code online, please be aware that dropline gnome has been using their own build system, on request I might be able to create a few slackbuilds tho. below you find the svn checkout command. svn checkout svn://svn.code.sf.net/p/dropline-gnome/code/dbs/branches/dlg_current dlg_systemd How to use the build system: modify file: etc/config than build your package with ./dbs build <packagename> Please note that we build dlg with pam support for gdm, but you can offcourse alter the systemd script to not use pam. currently only login, sessions, polkit and gdm. so using ssh does not invoke pam for example. a little howto can be found here: https://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/dr...me3_10_Systemd |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
i still dont (and i think i will never) understand, why systemd, upstartd etc. was made/needed.
doesnt the old "never touch a running (aka work) system" count anymore? sysvinit aka the bsd like init system works find and did since forever. I really like the bashscript approach. why must humanity allways try to reinvent wheels.. i really dont get it! greatings. Stuferus ps.: maybe we leave this alone, im sure patrick (i hope i may "you" him :) ) knows it all, maybe feels the same and will stay away from systemd as long as possible. mybe we could port the orginal bsd init, or invent our own wheel - lol - if the time comes? :D |
i was a happy arch user before systemd was incorporated. i did not only leave arch because of systemd, but also because of the fact that the core developer team lied (in a poettering style) to the community to get systemd into arch. so i consider arch not as a "community driven distribution" anymore.
i like the unix aspects of linux, thats the reason i use it. i follow the unix philosophy. systemd is windows software. it runs on linux, but its architecture is windows like. an example: polipo wouldnt start, so i start to investigate. i found an error protocoll (forget where) and it told me what to do - it was a command line which i copied and pasted into an xterm. when i found out what this command actually was, i was shocked, it was a command to read the systemd log file, because the systemd log is *binary*. that was the moment when i realized that systemd and arch linux is nothing for me. on the other hand - without systemd i would have never returned to slackware. and i feel much better with slackware now. |
Hi,
systemd is a departure from traditional system init software and philosophy of UNIX (what that means can be found on Wikipedia). These are the most serious problems of systemd: - its dependencies - other software like DEs being dependent on it - taking over functionality of other software modules and by doing so driving a wedge into an ecosystem of Linux/UNIX/BSD* OSs/distros - propagating baseless propaganda about its "parallelism" that does not work because it does not account for concurrency problems and requirements - complexity that will become a nightmare for sysadmins and users - yes, it is a Red Hat product, and based on the above, it is supposed to serve its goals It is a poisonous system software that should be treated with suspicion it deserves. There is a counter offensive under way lead by OpenRC devs. It is a Gentoo sponsored product: http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/OpenRC#CGroups_support but its implementation is under way in e.g. Arch Linux, by a good dev called artoo: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=152606&p=10 and is employed by many users of Linux systems with great success. So, go out and help OpenRC become an advanced sys init software that applies principles of UNIX, adds even more modern features beyond of what already offers, is compatible with existing UNIX/Linux/BSD* systems, and by that become an antidote to much of what systemd offers. jb |
Quote:
Code:
In Unix-based computer operating systems, init (short for initialization) is the first Quote:
- there might be some software depending on it, but so far all DE's can run without systemd. - taking over functionality ? systemd is taking all kernel functions into its program. kdbus, cgroups just 2 examples. about your parallelism, that is user/distro configuration. - Journalctl >>>>> all over logging (IMO) - unit files are very easy when you get used to it - no comment about the red hat part. Quote:
CGroups is linux-kernel (will not work on BSD) The reason that people (LP) are developping a new init system, is that current sysvinit is old, outdated, and does not evolve with the rest of the linux world. |
Quote:
http://sporkbox.us/blog/?r=page/95 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
@ bartgymnast
regarding that statement: "systemd is a departure from traditional system init software and philosophy of UNIX (what that means can be found on Wikipedia)." I was about to answer you with references to original discussions in Fedora when I noticed that a poster JWJones included a link to relevant answers. Excellent ! So I do not want to duplicate them - I just ask you to spend some time on these two threads (display them as threads and follow the posts, keeping in mind that their flows were interrupted by "well-wishers"): http://lists.fedoraproject.org/piper...ne/152323.html etc. jb |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Thus, if a datacenter system administrator booted up ten thousand servers, and a hundred of them failed to bring up sshd, the administrator could use a remote connection (akin to IPMI) to rectify the problem without having to roll a crash-cart to each problem server. This would make it more useful than the serial console, occupying a niche between in-band and out-of-band system management. Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Code:
wget http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/Pubs/TechRpts/2006/EECS-2006-1.pdf |
Quote:
slackware with systemd 1 root 20 0 4928 2920 2076 S 0 0.1 0:01.54 systemd non-systemd (standard slackware) 1 root 20 0 4352 712 612 S 0 0.0 0:02.21 init on todays system, I dont call that much of resources. Code:
ldd `which systemd` Code:
ldd `which init` you have extra: libdl, libattr, libdbus, libcap, rest is systemd libaries so libattr = package a/attr libcap = l/libcap libdbus = a/dbus libdl = l/glibc as glibc is needed for both, there are currently 3 extra packages. systemd is using libcap, and that depends on libattr and dbus is being replaced by kdbus (kernel dbus) so it is the almost same deps as sysvinit+udev *systemd is init+udev and memory footprint is low. |
Quote:
You need neither KDE nor GNOME to have a perfectly fine Linux desktop. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:36 AM. |