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.
Its like they want to use Slackware, but only if it gets systemd.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7
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.
Then comes the other "they" factor. They are Slackware users who seem to think if Slackware is forced to adapt, it will no longer be Slackware. Reckon they came to Slackware only for the BSD-style init, as other distros like Ubuntu, Fedora etc. offer everything else Slackware does, served up in the same simple and stable ways. Surely they don't really care that PV can make the right decisions so much as claiming fealty to a BDFL and praising Bob doesn't get them as hot-and-bothered in forum threads as bashing Lennart Poettering and Redhat. Guess they can take their ball and go home (or to *BSD) while the rest of us will just keep plugging along and enjoying life with Slackware and everything else it brings.
At this point and after all the FUD, I'm even ready to say:
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.
Slackware is like Hotel California, you can never really leave
Not to suggest it, but I wonder if this would probably fit better into Slackware rather than the parent systemd project with uselessd being shaped as init-only?
Systemd doesn't just touch on technical issues, it also touches philosophical ones and philosophy will always cause long debates/arguments/shoe throwing contests. After all we have, as a species, put people to death for their philosophy.
I get why some of the serious technical folks are in despair over the debate, but for some of us, the philosophy
is why we're here in the first place. So it really is fascinating to read the debate.
Likewise, another good debate would be, does one use systemd, or does one wait for forked projects or reworked projects based on ideas introduced by systemd and use them instead? In a way it ends up almost a chicken and egg debate. Do you kill the chicken before it lays eggs and eat it, or do you let it lay eggs, hatch them, and have more chickens to sustain yourself?
Not to suggest it, but I wonder if this would probably fit better into Slackware rather than the parent systemd project with uselessd being shaped as init-only?
What is uselessd's stand on kdbus integration? A switch to uselessd in my eyes only makes sense if non-systemd inits that want to use udev don't come up with an alternative kdbus userspace.
I'm just amazed at how quickly SystemD was implemented into major distributions, especially since it comes from the same people who brought us "PulseAudio."
It should not blow your mind. The results that can be achieved by someone with lots of money in a predominantly volunteer environment are not amazing, but predictable.
Uselessd and kdbus are not even involved with each other. Uselessd is an init system only, and has nothing to do with kdbus.
Kdbus is aimed at udev. Totally separate entity. Totally separate topic.
I disagree, is not a totally different topic. At first, that udev is the first software to make use of kdbus does not make kdbus being aimed at udev, it still is a general purpose IPC mechanism. Anyways, as long as no upstream software wants to make use of it that is fine, but this may change, if only for performance reasons (well, it also may fail to be adopted, but I doubt that). Udev will only be the first one, it is very likely that other software will make use of kdbus, too, in the future.
Seeing that, IMHO there are only two reasons for Slackware to switch the init system:
1. Mr. Volkerding suddenly starts to like systemd and wants it in Slackware.
2. Upstream software that is used in Slackware and not easily replaced depends on functionality provided only by other init systems (it doesn't matter if this is kdbus, logind, hostnamed or whatever else).
I would guess that #1 is rather unlikely, so let's look at #2: To see if a different init system would be an appropriate replacement for Slackware's current init it has to be determined if that init system can provide the needed functionality. While things like systembsd and systemd-shim may work independent of the init system in use there is still no effort made to come up with an alternate kdbus userspace. So kdbus may in the end be the only factor to decide which init system to use and in that light a switch to an init system that doesn't provide kdbus support does not make much sense.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
