LinuxQuestions.org
View the Most Wanted LQ Wiki articles.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices



Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 07-13-2013, 12:15 AM   #61
cwizardone
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2007
Distribution: Slackware64-current & "True Multilib." PC-BSD.
Posts: 2,273

Rep: Reputation: 186Reputation: 186

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post
...which of the goal is to isolate GNU/Linux entirely from other UNIX-like distributions, but for what reason is unknown. In my humble opinion, which may differ from others, I see Red Hat making a power play with it's legions of developers to seize control of enough of GNU/Linux for their own purposes. Why is it the majority of the people working on all these projects to isolate and segregate Linux out of UNIX all are somehow linked to Red Hat in some way, shape, or form?...
If any one company is out to seize control of Linux it is Google. They have the money
to make it happen. They have already gotten to Adobe and, it would appear, Opera.

"When all else fails, i.e., doesn't make sense, follow the money."
 
Old 07-13-2013, 01:01 AM   #62
salparadise
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Birmingham UK
Distribution: Freeslack
Posts: 1,714

Rep: Reputation: 106Reputation: 106
Speaking as the most untechnical Slackware user currently alive (no seriously), I can say, with hand on heart, that I've been through the Manjaros and the openSuSEs and the Netrunners, et al, and they're all shiny and zippy and it's lovely to see the laptop boot in 12 seconds but, the penny dropped for me when I realised that convenience is a fool's goal.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 07-13-2013, 01:04 AM   #63
ttk
Member
 
Registered: May 2012
Location: Sebastopol, CA
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 262
Blog Entries: 13

Rep: Reputation: 219Reputation: 219Reputation: 219
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloomingNutria View Post
We're not.
It's been in the back of my mind since 2003'ish.

There's a place in life for contingency planning, as long as it doesn't distract us too much from the good things in front of us today.

Slackware is good, today.
 
Old 07-13-2013, 01:57 AM   #64
Kallaste
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2011
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 344

Rep: Reputation: 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by ttk View Post
It's been in the back of my mind since 2003'ish.
And here we are ten years later still doing great. That's my point.

The OP said that we shouldn't have to be faced with the problem of finding a more sane Unix-like distribution, as though we were indeed faced with that problem. Well, we're not. It's as simple as that.

Certainly the OP or anyone else can and should go to another distro if they wish it, but spreading propaganda to the effect that it is now somehow necessary for us to do so is not, in my opinion, fair to the people who work to maintain Slackware for all of us.

Contingency planning is one thing. Fear mongering on a public forum about the viability of someone else's project is quite another. I am not directing this statement at you, because this may even be the first you have seen of the systemd arguments in this forum, if you don't like to waste your time reading long threads at 3:00 am like I do, so please don't be offended.

Don't get me wrong, as I said, I very much dislike systemd, and I don't even have a problem bashing it in technical terms on thread after thread, as has been done around here over the past few months (as long as people have something new to say and are not just talking to hear themselves speak or get attention, which unfortunately has not lately been the case). But I will not do it at the expense of Slackware.

I do believe it is harmful to Slackware if well-meaning but uninformed users go around saying we may have to abandon it in favor of a "more sane" OS. I think I would be pretty irritated if someone did that in reference to my project, and the longest time investment I've had in a project was 6 months! PV and crew are the ones who have to make decisions regarding Slackware's future, and we have not heard so much as a whisper of impending doom from them. They have not thrown in the towel, so how about we just leave it in their hands, instead of trying to rip it away and throw it for them?

That's all I'm saying.

Last edited by Kallaste; 07-13-2013 at 03:11 AM. Reason: minor correction.
 
9 members found this post helpful.
Old 07-14-2013, 12:53 AM   #65
ReaperX7
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Location: California
Distribution: LFS-7.6, Slackware 14.1, FreeBSD 10.1
Posts: 3,834
Blog Entries: 15

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 1188Reputation: 1188Reputation: 1188Reputation: 1188Reputation: 1188Reputation: 1188Reputation: 1188Reputation: 1188Reputation: 1188
I'm not discrediting Patrick or anyone in their efforts to keep Slackware as sane as possible. They've done a fine job in doing so, but the fact of the matter is, look at all the software starting to incorporate some part of systemd into itself. This isn't propaganda. This is fact. Eventually, unless an exuberant amount of patches are made to exclude or give optionality for systemd, just about all distributions will get it in some way shape or form.

My concern is shaped around this simple question...

"Why is there such a rush to integrate systemd and adopt it without thorough evaluations?"

There is already enough projects that are similar in function in a more modular design to what systemd wants to accomplish as a whole as a single entity.

And then I have another questions that is in regards to how Windows system requirements shot up after Microsoft revamped it's svchost.exe daemon...

"Will systemd bring in so much functionality control that it will raise system requirements for CPU and RAM?"

The first question in my opinion is just recklessness to adopt bleeding edge software with no regards as to what it will affect, break, and erode.

The second question should raise concern because svchost and systemd share a commonality. The more they bring in to control, the higher the system requirements rise. Windows XP's svchost required very little RAM to run on it's minimal system. On Vista/7/8 this rose dramatically as svchost brought in more functionality. So do I have a concern Linux's system requirements could rise? Yes, I do, and so should others.

For me, FreeBSD is the contingency plan that has the best options to the current which I use which is Slackware. I would hope to not have to jump ship, but keep FreeBSD and Slackware running side by side, but I can only hope that sanity begins at the upstream and stops some of the madness before it spreads and we end up knee deep in a huge mess.

Last edited by ReaperX7; 07-14-2013 at 12:56 AM.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 07-14-2013, 01:38 AM   #66
cwizardone
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2007
Distribution: Slackware64-current & "True Multilib." PC-BSD.
Posts: 2,273

Rep: Reputation: 186Reputation: 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post
..look at all the software starting to incorporate some part of systemd into itself...
As a relatively complete novice, I'm aware this is probably a dumb question, but would this have anything to do with the references to systemd I've found on my system? I just did a search for "systemd" and found,

/lib/systemd/system/wicd.service,

and

README_systemd at /usr/doc/libcgroup-0.38,

and

/usr/lib/systemd/system/hplip-service@.service

and

_systemd at /usr/share/zsh/5.0.2/functions
 
Old 07-14-2013, 12:06 PM   #67
jtsn
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2011
Location: Europe
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 908

Rep: Reputation: 446Reputation: 446Reputation: 446Reputation: 446Reputation: 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post
The second question should raise concern because svchost and systemd share a commonality. The more they bring in to control, the higher the system requirements rise. Windows XP's svchost required very little RAM to run on it's minimal system. On Vista/7/8 this rose dramatically as svchost brought in more functionality. So do I have a concern Linux's system requirements could rise? Yes, I do, and so should others.
You missed the reason, why svchost.exe actually exists on Windows in the first place. Processes on Windows NT are expensive (require a lot of resources), you can only have a few. Processes on Unix are cheap due to fork(), you can have a lot of them without penalties.

The svchost.exe (Sevice Host) is an appraoch to merge multiple service into one process to actually reduce the system requirements of Windows NT. The default install of early Windows NT versions did run below 10 processes to fit into 16 MB of memory. So it is primarily a workaround for the limitations of the OS kernel.

You just stumbled over another example, why operating system design actually matters.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 07-14-2013, 03:53 PM   #68
newbeliever
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jan 2011
Location: With my computer
Distribution: Slackware 32/64 bit
Posts: 14

Rep: Reputation: 0
Well, I think I have read about all I am gonna be able to read (for right now that is) on the subject of systemd. The answer is simple and very clear to me; now that I have been testing many flavorful setups I know what I want and need to do; I believe it is the Chinese proverb that states "In interesting times we live", well, I couldn't have chosen a more interesting time to commit to what I believe than the present. I have tasted the Linux menu and moved back to the M$ table because that at the time was the job controlling my menu, but now that I have been placed back in the lime light of the only IT guy at my job place (as of this morning) I have a group of Directors salivating with there desires for our network needs.

I want to thank Mr. Volkerding, the Slackware Team, and the Slackware Community from the bottom of my heart.

I am a newbie, having only tasted the surface of this wonderful distro, and I am a Slackware junkie; I haven't felt as at home with an OS as I do now. I have a lot ahead of me and I am not waiting to start, cause I want to live the meat and potatoes of this OS.

No matter what direction the knights of the round table decide to go with the future versions I will be here devouring its richness and basking in its radiance.

Thank you to all, I have a lot to get done and little time to do it in, so see you on the forums. God Bless!
 
Old 07-14-2013, 10:34 PM   #69
bsdunixdb
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jun 2009
Location: London, United Kingdom
Distribution: Slackware-x86_64+multilib (stable)
Posts: 25

Rep: Reputation: 3
Unhappy

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post
The good point about Patrick I've noticed over the years is he's very stoic when it comes to change affecting other distributions. It's hard for Patrick to flinch and say "Okay we need it". My biggest hope is that distributions like Slackware, LFS, and Gentoo can be the stalwart distributions defying the odds against systemd in their own says and proving systemd is no better than the current implementations of OpenRC, SysVInit, and BSDInit, and ultimately isn't needed, and is a true bad idea saying in unison, "No, we don't need it, nor do we want it."

I dare to say there will be a time soon when distributions like Slackware, Gentoo, and LFS become the focal point distributions when all others start having troubles that can be fixed, or won't be fixed.

However, today I've been digging deeper and deeper into my FreeBSD 9.1 installation and have been playing around with all the Linux binary compatibility tools and so far it's been painless getting Linux stuff working under FreeBSD.

FreeBSD reminds me a lot of Slackware with many of the same principles and focuses, especially the biggest one of them all... Simplicity works.
I think you will find that Gentoo uses systemd according to Distrowatch.

All the best.
 
Old 07-15-2013, 05:39 AM   #70
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Main: Gentoo Others: What fits the task
Posts: 15,653
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsdunixdb View Post
I think you will find that Gentoo uses systemd according to Distrowatch.

All the best.
Gentoo can use systemd, but by default it comes with OpenRC.
 
Old 07-15-2013, 03:56 PM   #71
ReaperX7
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Location: California
Distribution: LFS-7.6, Slackware 14.1, FreeBSD 10.1
Posts: 3,834
Blog Entries: 15

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 1188Reputation: 1188Reputation: 1188Reputation: 1188Reputation: 1188Reputation: 1188Reputation: 1188Reputation: 1188Reputation: 1188
Yes, Gentoo made it entirely optional. Gentoo is still OpenRC/SysVInit based. There are offshoots of Gentoo using systemd, but the main developers and maintainers have said they aren't switching and don't plan to.

Also, DistroWatch does get bad information from time to time.

Last edited by ReaperX7; 07-15-2013 at 04:00 PM.
 
  


Reply


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: The Future of Unix Standards: Unix 10? LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 12-30-2009 04:30 AM
Would you consider FreeBSD 7.0 a good choice for a sever? x3kyu510n Linux - Server 3 03-17-2008 02:04 PM
Is FreeBSD the right choice? LOL *BSD 11 09-28-2007 07:26 PM
LXer: Desktop FreeBSD: 64-bit Future LXer Syndicated Linux News 1 10-06-2006 12:14 PM
Thinking of Installing FreeBSD brokenflea *BSD 1 10-28-2004 12:28 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:51 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
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