Disagreeing using logical statements, arguments is better than insulting other members in my considered opinion.

You are an A**hole (No Offense) LOL

Let me just sign off take care guys.

kernel-P4N1C, don't insult. Just mock like above. :-)

Thank you

I appreciate it!

To get back on topic. I am happy with what ever software choices that Mr. Volkerding makes for future Slackware releases. I trust his judgement. He will make the final call on systemd.

This thread has a question, the answer, and 16 pages of questionable value.

5 members found this post helpful.

I too will trust Patrick's judgments on what will happen regarding systemd, but I would hope that Slackware can set an example for other distributions to not behave as lemmings following a Pied Piper.

Back on my last point, and to close. Slackware is one of the oldest and most respected of Linux distributions out there, because Slackware not only abides by some form of an Open-UNIX/UNIX-like standard, but maintains a system works when you use quality stuff and not solutions in search of problems. For Lennart Poettering to make statements as "Oh God! Slackware?" is not just disrespectful to Slackware as a Linux distribution, but disrespectful to Patrick and everyone who has contributed to and used Slackware faithfully all these years.

"If it hadn't been for 386/BSD getting a lawsuit when it did, Linux might not have existed", as paraphrased from Linus Torvalds. Linux owes a lot to BSD, especially it's existence. For Lennart to say BSD is irrelevant, is an insult to BSD but Linux also.

Lennart should be the one to pick his words carefully, because just as they could build him up, they could just as well crucify him. My criticism of him and Red Hat are abstract, but abstract with foundations.

And with that I end that.

3 members found this post helpful.

Agreed. And I don't think there's a need for us to panic as long as 'The Man' is in his sane mind and home brewing fine quality beer to keep it that way.
[And BTW, Lennart didn't insult Slackware (he can't), he turned into a believer the moment he realized the philosophy and yelled with joy, Oh God! Slackware!!!]

Regards.

Yeah, in the perfect world that happened... meanwhile back in the real world...

Damn! Who would have thought that systemd would have spurred such and interesting thread. I even learned some new cuss words and flame threats while reading here. Is this the beginning of a whole new vi/emacs style feud. Should be interesting to watch.

My personal experience with systemd is with Arch Linux, my secondary OS on my main systems. Arch dropped systemd components into the mix on their repos a few weeks back. It caused some consternation and confusion. Its use is optional at this time, though. My prediction was that the optional option would probably disappear from Arch eventually, so I figured what the hell, I'll take the plunge.

Running Pure Systemd in Arch

The conversion was surprisingly painless in Arch. Debugging was minimal. Would I want to see systemd implemented in Slackware? Not necessarily. I think it would violate Slack's KISS principles, which coincidently, I think is also the case with Arch. I'm not an Arch dev, so I can't really criticize, I don't guess.

As you get older, you begin to appreciate simple, tried-and-true things. Surprises are for the young.

It is times like these that I am glad that we have a steady hand on the tiller to help us navigate the choppy waters. PV does not like systemd.

I moved over 30 OT comments to a separate thread in an attempt to clean up OT-ness and to (ab)use the cardboard burger slogan I'm not lovin' it. One last time: please keep this thread on topic from here on.

Amen.

The term that Patrick used: "systemd is a solution in search of a problem" is what systemd is all about, just like PulseAudio.

If you notice systemd is meant to replace open-UNIX standard sysvinit and bsdinit with a Linux only subsystem and roll in functions from udev and invite functions in from GNOME3, PulseAudio, and other non-vital system components. This adds not just complexity, but it adds bloat to the system as well by using more memory space and can screw up loads.

Systemd does shave off some boot time from Arch which is about 2 seconds on my system which is barely even noticed, however, again it does add more resource usage levels which I'm not comfortable with and I've had to, several times, reload the networking, samba, and audio daemons because systemd fouled up during the load and skipped some components because the dependency wasn't loaded or took too long to load, even though they are in the order recommended by Arch. If Arch goes full systemd, Arch will go bye-bye. 2 seconds over the stability of sysvinit for a system daemon that can have a tendency to screw up, no thank you.

In fact the screw ups from loading are what have turned me off of it. I gave it a chance from Arch's addition of it and honestly, I expected better because someone said to give it a chance. The ability to natively load in parallel is nice without the extra scripting, but the dependencies getting bogged down in loads caused so much of the system not to get loaded requiring me to manually load upwards of five components several times. I did everything you did Eric and still ended up with ab half working system. I don't have the patience for stuff that isn't well founded, and couldn't you do the same work with scripted parallelization in sysvinit and bsdinit?

Under sysvinit and/or bsdinit my system loads in about 10-15 seconds. Under systemd it loads in 8-13 seconds. Not much gained. However when you have to go back and manually reload components of the system it takes longer, especially when the scripts require using the systemd tools to load them rather than the Bash shell which took me about 3 minutes to get my system completely loaded. Upon reboots often some components would load right, but on other reboots, it messed up.

If I were to have a Spock moment: "Usage of a tool that is not well founded, tested, nor able to function correctly in all environments, conditions, and areas it is needed to do so, is not logical."

Didn't want to double post but my reply was a bit long, so this is only to break it down somewhat.

I could see where systemd MIGHT be useful for a power user or hardcore Linux enthusiast with a fully customized system who wants a more aggressive break-your-neck speed system, but servers, average, and new users need more simplified tools that don't require a lot of work and debugging.

Sysvinit and bsdinit are simple tools for simple people, and yes, systemd would break the KISS principle of Slackware completely. It's a fast system to use, but as far as reliability goes, it's sketchy, and it requires too much work to get working correctly, and it's system heavy is resource usage.