I did not think a smiley icon was necessary to convey the humour.
Now I must sit in a corner and cry.

Seems to be a few in this place with a god complex. Seems it's real easy; to _not_ be bothered by something one might read, don't go to that thread.

1 members found this post helpful.

This thread is a black hole: once you're in, you can't get out.

It's got nothing to do with a god complex. Consider this. You are working on a Linux distribution, trying to keep it stable, independent and modern, and you have to read the endless crap in this thread, it REALLY is taking away the motivation to keep slogging on said distro.
I mean, half the people in this thread take it as set in stone that Slackware will implement systemd and that everybody will abandon Slackware if that happens. Why bother spending most of my free time on Slackware if all I see is people threatening to leave the distro to rot instead of trusting the Slackware team to do the right thing?

I am going to unsubscribe from this cesspit of a thread right after hitting ENTER.

21 members found this post helpful.

Eric,

I've used Slackware for a little over 10 years. I will always have Slackware as my main operating system. I value and very-much appreciate the work that you, Pat, Robby, and the entire Slackware team does for us. I am committed to supporting and running Slackware.
To my fellow Slackers: Please consider buying a subscription to Slackware.

Slackware Subscription

3 members found this post helpful.

Im very new to slackware I suppose. I have been on a massive learning curve since leaving the other distros that 'do everything' for you. I must say I think Slackware is refreshing, even if a little testing at times :-) and I have settled on it because of its heritage origins (one of the first etc) and that to me it all makes sense (as far as I understand it currently) and is seemingly 'simple' to use once you learn.

I cannot comment on systemd as I dont understand it enough, though I have 'used' it in other distros.

Any way my main point: I would trust the likes of the Slackware creators, maintainers and the main people that steer it along to 'do the right thing'. If systemd is scientifically and resourcefully the best option decided by proper evaluation, then that is the way to go. If it isn't then there is a large enough community of clever brains and experience to show (not by anecdote, but by proper analysis) why systemd should not progress as the choice and something else should (or perhaps to keep the status quo).

If choices are made by pressure of popular, vested interest, perhaps commercial moves, rather than what is by scientific and resourceful evaluation the best option..then that is the real mistake.

Just my two penneth. Dont drop Slackware.....I'm hooked.

This thread, the LQ Slackware forum and indeed LQ do not represent the vast proportion of Slackware users, so it really is a shame that you feel that way.

What we've see in this thread and the previous threads like it, are hysteria, FUD and a few people trolling their arses off to whip it up (clearly some of the other distros' sections don't get much traffic). The latter have succeeded as the page count will attest. I've seen a tiny minority of Slackware using systemd proponents, none were hardline and most constructed well reasoned posts as to why they preferred it. The main proponents of systemd in this thread have not been Slackware users. That makes sense, as in general if you like systemd, you probably don't want to use a distro like Slackware...

2 members found this post helpful.

Absolutely agree with hitest in post #1010.

Its like they want to use Slackware, but only if it gets systemd. Thats what makes no fucking sense, pardon my language.

1 members found this post helpful.

an other dubious statement, like the thread title
who wants to use systemd, who is 'they'? this sounds really unhealthy.
most people do not care, and systemd its much more less important and a requirement for several concrete scenarios like than say PAM, at least at the moment
but what is annoying, at least to me, is the FUD, like mass exodus, and several technical claims in the range of wild speculations to simply nonsense.
and if someone tries to clarify technical stuff he/she is put into a corner, like 'they' want.. what ever 'they'.. means.
so I think the idea to simply ignore nonsense and technical speculations without any background in this thread is not a bad one.

3 members found this post helpful.

The "they" factor are people who are, in reference, people who don't use Slackware, or people who use Slackware expecting it to be like Ubuntu, Fedora, etc. doing everything for you hands-free.

Not that you can't add hands-free into Slackware, or set it up with existing tools included out-of-the-box, "they", as referenced, want more and more not included out-of-the-box, or think they have enough technical merit to say how an operating system should be put together in their opinion, but more or less, when compared against each other's statements, all seem to echo more of the same talks coming from upstream developers, and less of their own actual experience putting a system together. "They" see the current design as broken, again echoing the same rhetoric, but offer no proof of concept how it is broken by design nor can give examples of how the current design of the bazaar model is worse than the cathedral design "they" claim is better.

There is no talk about how the stability of one package plays an important role, and how even different packages can all coalesce together to form a stable environment. Do you grab monolith package A, lock into it, and patchwork it to death, or use bazaar packages A, B, G, X, and Z independent of each other to form a working stable model?

Yet, "they" feel "they" know what is good for everyone, or more bluntly they all seem to echo this... "If I want your opinion, I'll give it to you."

1 members found this post helpful.

Here's a good situation for you to consider. And this is an EXAMPLE only.

systemd-250 is used in a distribution. Following deployment, a critical bug is found in udev rendering udev inoperable. The distribution maintainer files a bug upstream, but after a few days is only told that the problem is being investigated, yet no solution, even temporary, is given. Distribution maintainer considers rolling back to version 249, but runs into a critical problem. Version 249 had a problem with stability issues with the init system crashing when the kernel loads, but still has no patches, only the version up. Version 248 is investigated, but then a bigger problem arrises, a new mission critical daemon he is using, an auto-healing anti-crash design added in with 249, is a key component of his distribution. No patches exist to add in said frameworks, and the stand-alone project was abandoned a few years prior. Now the distribution has a serious problem. The developer tries to look for a stand-alone udev, but quickly learns that back in the 22x series, stand-alone udev was ended. Weeks go by and no patch is made, but in that time, users have moved on and now a newer version 251 arrives, and while it fixes udev, now the auto-healing part is broken and a security flaw is found in the console daemon that could allow a hacker access to kernel level resources with a buffer overflow attack.

This is only hypothetical, but it's an example of how the monolithic design has critical flaws. Even with the best efforts, there are bugs in software, and while some bugs can be harmless, others can cripple a distribution, or even promote security issues.

This is why we keep saying that stability isn't just from one package, it's from every package working together smoothly, correctly, and even if not the most recent version, it works with superior stability.

1 members found this post helpful.

Can someone make a Forum on LQ called "Blackhole" or "Bitching Matches" and move this thread to it! Enough with the pro/anti systemd stuff. Only PV will add it or not. If people "leave" slackware so be it. It's survived for 21 + years and I ams sure it'll survive for as long as PV wants it to. Can we move on to more interesting things now....

3 members found this post helpful.

Why are you using Linux? Shouldn't you be using GNU/Hurd?

Anyone can invent a bunch of unlikely theoretical scenarios to prove any point they wish to make. This is called FUD. Stop that.

1 members found this post helpful.

Just a thought: could these distinguished gentlemen who expertly discuss the quality of software design exhibit just a small computer program doing something useful they personally wrote, so we be sure they know what they speak about?