LinuxQuestions.org
Go Job Hunting at the LQ Job Marketplace
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 11-14-2013, 03:07 PM   #31
Okie
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2002
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 964

Rep: Reputation: 34

as an old slacker i agree with those that dont want systemd, you cant just build a drop-in replacement of the init system, its like the launch codes on an ICBM multi-warhead nuclear missile = not something to be meddling with if you want it to all work properly
 
4 members found this post helpful.
Old 11-14-2013, 03:17 PM   #32
tuxbg
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2012
Location: Bulgaria,Varna
Distribution: Slackware64
Posts: 249

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
I just want to test it.Why so much hate ?
 
5 members found this post helpful.
Old 11-14-2013, 03:19 PM   #33
Darth Vader
Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: Romania
Distribution: DARKSTAR Linux 2008.1
Posts: 659

Rep: Reputation: 138Reputation: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alien Bob View Post
As far as I know, SystemD does not support /usr being a separate filesystem unless you yourself ensure that it gets mounted before SystemD starts (i.e. you need to mount it in the initrd). See http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software...usr-is-broken/ for a piece of arrogance barfed up by our favourite Slackware destroyer.

Eric
As far as I know, the separate /usr issue exists right now, even with the glorious and so orthodox udev. This is the price payed to have a super-cool auto-configuration, but having apps or libraries as dependencies in /usr...

That's why most of us we need a properly initrd to boot our super nice auto-configured (and so encrypted?) operating system.

To be honest, even I believe too that the page author is a rare piece of arrogance, still I do not see nothing wrong in that page...
 
Old 11-14-2013, 03:21 PM   #34
bartgymnast
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Lelystad, Netherlands
Distribution: slack 7.1 till latest and -current, LFS
Posts: 272

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 93
tuxbg,

the error after using your login name is because of the file /etc/login.defs
you will need the one supplied with the package.

most likely it is still /etc/login.defs.new

I updated the build script to make sure it is not .new, people can change the options later as needed.

Last edited by bartgymnast; 11-14-2013 at 03:27 PM.
 
Old 11-14-2013, 03:22 PM   #35
Stuferus
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2013
Location: Germany
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 144

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxbg View Post
I just want to test it.Why so much hate ?
i think that would work better with an other linux than slackware at the moment..
 
Old 11-14-2013, 03:33 PM   #36
tuxbg
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2012
Location: Bulgaria,Varna
Distribution: Slackware64
Posts: 249

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuferus View Post
i think that would work better with an other linux than slackware at the moment..
You are funny guy
 
Old 11-14-2013, 03:39 PM   #37
tuxbg
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2012
Location: Bulgaria,Varna
Distribution: Slackware64
Posts: 249

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by bartgymnast View Post
tuxbg,

the error after using your login name is because of the file /etc/login.defs
you will need the one supplied with the package.

most likely it is still /etc/login.defs.new

I updated the build script to make sure it is not .new, people can change the options later as needed.
Yes it was my mistake.I override /etc/login.defs and now all things works
 
Old 11-14-2013, 03:44 PM   #38
Darth Vader
Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: Romania
Distribution: DARKSTAR Linux 2008.1
Posts: 659

Rep: Reputation: 138Reputation: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxbg View Post
Yes it was my mistake.I override /etc/login.defs and now all things works
Then, you do not have now any "separate /usr" problems?
 
Old 11-14-2013, 03:46 PM   #39
tuxbg
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2012
Location: Bulgaria,Varna
Distribution: Slackware64
Posts: 249

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vader View Post
Then, you do not have now any "separate /usr" problems?
No i dont have "any" login problems
 
Old 11-14-2013, 03:50 PM   #40
bartgymnast
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Lelystad, Netherlands
Distribution: slack 7.1 till latest and -current, LFS
Posts: 272

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 93
good to hear tuxbg,

the next package on my list to do this weekend is util-linux.
this package is linked against libudev.so.0, but systemd/udev since v187 (if not mistaken) is using libudev.so.1

As you see in the systemd.slackbuild it uses currently the ugly hack of linking libudev.so.0 to libudev.so.1
That should at the end not be needed anymore.

If you came across things that might seem to be a problem, do not hesitate to write it here. or send to my mail
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 11-14-2013, 03:51 PM   #41
Darth Vader
Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: Romania
Distribution: DARKSTAR Linux 2008.1
Posts: 659

Rep: Reputation: 138Reputation: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxbg View Post
No i dont have "any" login problems
Long story short, the SystemD works in your system as expected and you consider that, as replacement (now!) of the orthodox BSD-like init of Slackware, it works equal or even better?
 
Old 11-14-2013, 03:52 PM   #42
jprzybylski
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2011
Location: Canada
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 98

Rep: Reputation: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alien Bob View Post
As far as I know, SystemD does not support /usr being a separate filesystem unless you yourself ensure that it gets mounted before SystemD starts (i.e. you need to mount it in the initrd). See http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software...usr-is-broken/ for a piece of arrogance barfed up by our favourite Slackware destroyer.
Now, see, most days I don't mind systemd too much, but then they have things like this:

Quote:
Here's a short, very in-comprehensive list of software we are aware of that currently are not able to provide the full set of functionality when /usr is split off and not pre-mounted at boot: udev-pci-db/udev-usb-db and all rules depending on this (using the PCI/USB database in /usr/share), PulseAudio, NetworkManager, ModemManager, udisks, libatasmart, usb_modeswitch, gnome-color-manager, usbmuxd, ALSA, D-Bus, CUPS, Plymouth, LVM, hplip, multipath, Argyll, VMWare, the locale logic of most programs and a lot of other stuff.
And I think - why not just mount the stuff on fstab first? And who wants to run this stuff before filesystems come up? hplip? Really? Is it a problem that their core init program is linked to all this stuff, and this stuff is on /usr? How about not making the init linked to all this and, after processing fstab, start the bigger part of systemd? Seems easier than changing a 40-something-year-old concept.

But then I read this, and I get it. The word 'Solaris' appears 12 times. Compatibility to other Unixes/Linuxes translates to Solaris. Upstream is Solaris. Despite our closer cousins in BSD, they don't get mentioned once. It's an enterprise move so that Oracle doesn't need to try so hard to port our software.

In the end, if the technical reasons don't make sense, it's because they're made after the fact - it's really about the politics.

But now I'm being mean. I still want to see good stuff come out of these SlackBuilds!

EDIT: Heh, we were still on page 2 when I started that... whoops...

Last edited by jprzybylski; 11-14-2013 at 03:54 PM.
 
Old 11-14-2013, 03:55 PM   #43
tuxbg
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2012
Location: Bulgaria,Varna
Distribution: Slackware64
Posts: 249

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vader View Post
Long story short, the SystemD works in your system as expected and you consider that, as replacement (now!) of the orthodox BSD-like init of Slackware, it works equal or even better?
I just wont to test it.What's the problem?Why everybody judge me?
 
Old 11-14-2013, 04:00 PM   #44
bartgymnast
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Lelystad, Netherlands
Distribution: slack 7.1 till latest and -current, LFS
Posts: 272

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 93
tux, darth-vader wanted to have your opinion.

he wants to know if it works better, the same or worse than before
 
Old 11-14-2013, 04:02 PM   #45
Darth Vader
Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: Romania
Distribution: DARKSTAR Linux 2008.1
Posts: 659

Rep: Reputation: 138Reputation: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxbg View Post
I just wont to test it.What's the problem?Why everybody judge me?
I do not judge you, my friend! I just ask you if SystemD works fine as replacement of Slackware BSD-Init, which is really it, in our case...
 
  


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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:08 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