Website tells users to switch to Slackware in protest of systemd
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.
Could be a Bill Gates clone or cyborg created to subvert and destroy Linux?
P.S.
Has he ever said: "I vant your cloze, your bootz, und your modorzykle"?
No, they ignore GNOME, udev and the other "freedesktop" cruft unneeded to run a reliable server and storage OS. Systemd wasn't even mentioned in the post you quoted.
Technically you don't need use, freedesktops, or GNOME to have a reliable desktop and server OS.
FreeBSD provides KDE, devd, and other BSD tuned tools and packages that provide a working desktop and server OS that are very reliable. PC-BSD really shows what FreeBSD can do when unleashed as a desktop OS.
Yes. As said Prospero in The Tempest, Act V, Scene 1:
Quote:
Ye elves of hills, brooks, standing lakes, and groves,
And ye that on the sands with printless foot
Do chase the ebbing Neptune and do fly him
When he comes back; you demi-puppets that
By moonshine do the green sour ringlets make,
Whereof the ewe not bites; and you whose pastime
Is to make midnight mushrooms, that rejoice
To hear the solemn curfew; by whose aid,
Weak masters though ye be, I have bedimmed
The noontide sun, called forth the mutinous winds,
And ’twixt the green sea and the azured vault
Set roaring war—to th' dread rattling thunder
Have I given fire, and rifted Jove’s stout oak
-- William Shakespeare (Brian's elder, less talented brother)
Last edited by Didier Spaier; 06-05-2014 at 11:07 AM.
Technically you don't need use, freedesktops, or GNOME to have a reliable desktop and server OS.
That is the point, exactly.
Quote:
FreeBSD provides KDE, devd, and other BSD tuned tools and packages that provide a working desktop and server OS that are very reliable. PC-BSD really shows what FreeBSD can do when unleashed as a desktop OS.
And FreeBSD is still good, if it would not provide KDE. Because many users of BSD aren't interested in the desktop at all. They might be just fine with iOS on the phone, OS X on the client and FreeBSD on the server. After all, it's still BSD code running everything.
Could be a Bill Gates clone or cyborg created to subvert and destroy Linux? P.S.Has he ever said: "I vant your cloze, your bootz, und your modorzykle"?
It is actually our intention to unify distributions, and thus encourage
developers to ship unit files upstream that need no modification. I'd thus
enjoy if Debian and Fedora could adopt similar guidelines here.
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
Unified distributions = Goodbye bazaar, hello corporate homogeneity. Sad evolution (no pun intended).
The distributions should NEVER be unified. That in itself is a direction Linux was NEVER intended to go.
That's an Apple and Microsoft idealism.
Each distribution invokes unique and often groundbreaking methods of starting, running, and stopping a system. Because no two distributions are alike, up and coming distributions, or even developers seeking ideas, can look at various distributions and import ideas for their own to make yet again, another unique and powerful distribution int heir own right.
By uniting all the distributions you kill off uniqueness, limit variation, and destroy any ideas of using different methods that may or may not be more optimal under different settings than another.
If you want to see how unique differences are look at these:
Plan9's UNG/Linux. They incorporate almost no GNU tools and build the kernel and tools using LLVM. An entirely different, but unique, groundbreaking, and intriguing idea.
Slackware Linux. Invokes classic UNIX style management and UNIX universal scripting. Actually teaches you core Linux management techniques using low level tools. Invokes itself using BSD-stylized SysVinit scripting.
B/LFS. Do it yourself Linux honestly. Allows for so many levels of variation that honestly, each build by each person is almost never the same. Has dozens of contributed hints to allow all kinds of software, setups, and variations.
CRUX. Talk about cut the crap and get back to basics. CRUX is as close to a BSD distribution with a Linux core as you can get, possibly even more so than Gentoo on many levels.
It's variations like that that keep Linux in a constant state of evolution along different paths, but allows each path to forge new ideas, new paths, and even conceive in the development of new tools, new ideas, and new methods.
It is actually our intention to unify distributions [make them all look like Fedora], and thus encourage developers to ship unit files upstream that need no modification.
Of course, that would save Red Hat a lot of work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EYo
Unified distributions = Goodbye bazaar, hello corporate homogeneity. Sad evolution (no pun intended).
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
