Quote:
Sorry about the overly weird metaphor. |
Quote:
It is politics as well, and even religion for some. But "do one thing and do it well" IS POLITICAL, it's not inherent to code projects, it's the politics of GNU/Linux, and so is choice, it's policy. Both with long history and tradition in the GNU/Linux environment. That's just an example, but there are many policies deeply ingrained into the GNU/Linux environment (/people) and it's history and traditions. Someone with a blatant lack of respect for all that, is causing issues, so it's natural to discuss systemd on a "political level", because it's highly political. |
Quote:
systemd has not been proven harmless, neither have the intentions of its developer[s]. If anything, there is more reason to be suspicious of systemd than not. Slackware has been described as the distribution of the "cyber-luddite", and such people are way more trustful of long-tested, stable technology. Remember that each distro is not a mere distro but a mindset and an ethic, and for systemd to be integrated into Slackware would be to change the very ethos of the distribution. If Slackware were going to adopt systemd, it may as well call itself something else, because it would effectively be like having HRT, changing its gender and 'identifying' as another distribution. But this is all academic seeing as Eric has already said recently that there is "no need" to adopt systemd in Slackware. Slackware is very good at remaining true to itself, and that's one of the things that makes it so long-lasting and healthy. And that's a lesson that goes beyond just computing. Quote:
|
|
I didn't even know they used it. I haven't used Knoppix in donkey's years but I have fond memories of it. My first Linux (Red Hat 6) was so messed up by the friend who installed it for me that it was completely unbootable. So he gave me a Knoppix CD to use to straighten things out, which turned out to be easier than I expected. In those days Knoppix was probably the only live distro around.
|
Quote:
It is still actively maintained (latest is dated 2019-07-13) and closely follows Slackware current (an easy way to test Current on any PC). It provides persistence, optionally encrypted. To the best of my knowledge, it was the first to use the regular kernel "OverlayFS" union filesystem, instead of aufs which is used in many live distros (including Knoppix?) See doc at https://alien.slackbook.org/blog/sla...-live-edition/ Download at http://bear.alienbase.nl/mirrors/slackware-live/ Please Eric correct these links if they are not the preferred ones (especially the doc which points to a page dated Nov 2015 -- is it still the good one?) |
Quote:
Praise Bob. :) |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Two very good reads on group think: Extraordinary Popular Delusions & the Madness of Crowds https://www.amazon.com/Extraordinary.../dp/051788433X The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/04...t_bibl_vppi_i0 |
Quote:
|
Quote:
With that said, people smarter than me are working on this problem: Quote:
Quote:
@enorbet The answers to your questions will likely be found by reading/listening to the opinions of a distributor who packaged systemd for 5 years before finding effective ways to remove it from his Debian based distribution: http://www.linux-magazine.com/Issues...moving-systemd https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDXsw2ijRkw&t=17m06s Quote:
|
Quote:
Cheers. |
Quote:
Quote:
Creating this thread did lead me to some newer videos and papers that have clarified for me that systemd has very little to do with SOHO Desktop, which is apparently why the only plus I've ever witnessed, and even then only on some systems with some hardware, is the oft quoted but rarely realized "faster boot times" which I don't give a hoot about anyway. Enterprise Server Administration however does seem to have a longer list of benefits to enjoy from systemd, which is beginning to get through to me more of why the switch to systemd was nearly universal and so sudden. Just as most schools require a uniform program if not also the underlying system upon which it was developed so that a teacher/professor does not have to convert to a format that each and every individual student prefers, Enterprise values uniformity. They always have, even to ridiculous degrees. (Aside: I read that IBM employees were once "called up on the carpet" for not wearing garters on their approved socks! ) Apart from the ridiculous there is the consonant advantages of system-wide upgrades and improved security on every single workstation accomplished extremely quickly. I have to admit that this is not trivial nor is it the end of the benefits to Enterprise. I'm no longer even a candidate for really large business systems, so I don't really "have a dog in that race". The largest system I ever admin'd was just under 200 workstations and these days I'm down to roughly a dozen since I'm all but fully retired. Anyway judging from the gist of this thread and the reception, or lack thereof, of the original video here's one that gets a lot more specific about the value to Enterprise. Maybe 1 or 2 will actually watch it. --- Systemd - The Good Parts --- |
Quote:
Quote:
|
I could tolerate systemd if it would have been developed as an opt-in framework, I'd opt out and don't bother.
Speaking of its development, initiated and mainly dictated/driven by that failed endeavor (sold out), what was the name? RedHat..., I put systemd in the same boat with pulseaudio, same non-transparency, low quality code and bad documentation. As for features, I watched half of the video enorbert posted "--- Systemd - The Good Parts --- " , got bored and stopped, couldn't find anything interesting, other than the dbus stuff (really useful?), nothing you couldn't easily resolve with some basic bash scripting. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:04 PM. |