LinuxQuestions.org
Help answer threads with 0 replies.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices


Closed Thread
  Search this Thread
Old 08-14-2012, 01:33 PM   #121
kikinovak
MLED Founder
 
Registered: Jun 2011
Location: Montpezat (South France)
Distribution: CentOS, OpenSUSE
Posts: 3,440

Rep: Reputation: 2108Reputation: 2108Reputation: 2108Reputation: 2108Reputation: 2108Reputation: 2108Reputation: 2108Reputation: 2108Reputation: 2108Reputation: 2108Reputation: 2108

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymo View Post
It seems systemd moving forward for now. Arch Linux is transitioning to it very soon and so are a bunch of others. I say, give it a try and see if you like it. That's what I'm going to do.
I gave it a try, and I hated it, with the hatred of a taxi driver who will have to learn to drive again after buying a new Mercedes. The car may be 0.5 mp/h faster, but the pedals are suddenly all in the wrong place, and the lid is welded shut for mysterious reasons.

Systemd adheres to the KICK principle. Keep It Complicated Kiki. Plus, it's heavily endorsed by folks who will quote Derrida and Wittgenstein to prove you wrong. Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one frequently goes ranting on and on at ball-breaking length.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-14-2012, 02:04 PM   #122
fogpipe
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2011
Distribution: Slackware 64 -current,
Posts: 550

Rep: Reputation: 194Reputation: 194
I have watched this thread and am willing to take the word of those experienced with it that systemd may not be a good alternative, but i have some specific questions.

When i install a linux distro there are some changes i routinely make to the way it boots, changing video modes in lilo for one, setting syslog to send all log messages to one of my machines, modifying rc.local or its equivalent, modifying shutdown scripts to unmount remote filesystems etc, stopping useless (to me) services *cough* hald, consolekit*cough*.

Is there any of that i wont be able to do with systemd? Or is it that it is harder or that everything is in a different place or...?

Last edited by fogpipe; 08-14-2012 at 02:06 PM.
 
Old 08-14-2012, 03:31 PM   #123
eloi
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2010
Posts: 227

Rep: Reputation: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by vharishankar View Post
Sometimes, I feel I want to give up Linux simply because of projects that reinvent the wheel, add layer upon layer of complexity on existing solutions and then break stuff before repairing.
Some years ago, based in this same argument, I told to Xfce
developers (in a mailing list) that they were making the same
mistake than Gnome and KDE developers. All desktop environments
go in the same direction to give the user a pseudo
MSWindows/MacOSX experience. Seems moved by envy: "Look, Linux
can do that!". Linux desktop ends looking like a bad copy.

I use cp, mv and rm to manage my files. I have Fvwm and some
GTK applications by desktop, I can reproduce my environment in
any Unix without loosing any feature. Yes, I live in the Stone
Age, from the Lennart "infinite and beyond" Pottering point of
view (perhaps inspired in some Linus "Species" Torvalds' bad
understood Darwinism?).

But I am not a teenager (I'm 45 years old :-)) pretending to be
a hacker or "the command line guy" or "the slacker that carry a
gun"; how much lines of code does a graphical file manager with
all its dependencies need? Layer upon layer upon layer... All
this lines of code need to be maintained. Less lines of code
means less bugs, less security holes and less man power
development. Common sense.

I dialog constantly with the system via shell scripts. Even if
you are an experienced C developer it is a good thing to use
shell scripts in the init process because its flexibility. And
it is a good idea encourage new users to learn and use the shell
and edit configuration files (instead of i.e. stupid graphical
Network Managers). That's Unix. But I am not optimistic at all
taking in care that most Linux users today have not idea that
they use Linux. An Android user doesn't care if systemd or
whatever. The same can be said about the big majority of web
server companies out there whose owner (with three or more
identities to answer tickets :-)) lies on RedHat support. This
kind of users are the target of Lennart philosophy. Quality and
money are not friends.

Back to the top: one Xfce developer answered me that I had a
"weird" and "rare" idea about what software development is.
Just because I think that a Unix graphical environment should
help and complement (instead of replace or hide) the base
system.

Until today everybody has been relatively happy; did you not use
i.e. HAL?, you removed it. Besides, it doesn't hurt to give a
Windows like desktop to an unexperienced user (or may I say a
Windows user) while this goal doesn't become a priority to the
extent to interfere or even broke things for advanced unix
users.

Anyway I feel that I am alone in this, if Linus Torvals itself
uses a desktop environment... I don't understand: why do you
install kwrite, kate, kdevelop, konsole, kmail and all their
dependencies (or their gnome counterparts) for then using Pine
and u-emacs? What do you want kalarm for having cron? Why to
have mysql running just for indexing your files having find and
grep? What do you want all that KDE stupid imitation of MacOS
Dashboard for?

What I mean is: do you like all this big graphical applications
with hundred of dependencies? Then don't argue against
dependencies in package managers. Do you prefer all those
pretty icons and graphical functionality to plain text, command
line and shell scripting? Well, don't complain about systemd.
If you want to have all you will end with nothing.
 
10 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-14-2012, 03:51 PM   #124
Mercury305
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2012
Location: Rockville, MD
Distribution: CrunchBang / Ubuntu
Posts: 540

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by eloi View Post
Some years ago, based in this same argument, I told to Xfce
developers (in a mailing list) that they were making the same
mistake than Gnome and KDE developers. All desktop environments
go in the same direction to give the user a pseudo
MSWindows/MacOSX experience. Seems moved by envy: "Look, Linux
can do that!". Linux desktop ends looking like a bad copy.

I use cp, mv and rm to manage my files. I have Fvwm and some
GTK applications by desktop, I can reproduce my environment in
any Unix without loosing any feature. Yes, I live in the Stone
Age, from the Lennart "infinite and beyond" Pottering point of
view (perhaps inspired in some Linus "Species" Torvalds' bad
understood Darwinism?).

But I am not a teenager (I'm 45 years old :-)) pretending to be
a hacker or "the command line guy" or "the slacker that carry a
gun"; how much lines of code does a graphical file manager with
all its dependencies need? Layer upon layer upon layer... All
this lines of code need to be maintained. Less lines of code
means less bugs, less security holes and less man power
development. Common sense.

I dialog constantly with the system via shell scripts. Even if
you are an experienced C developer it is a good thing to use
shell scripts in the init process because its flexibility. And
it is a good idea encourage new users to learn and use the shell
and edit configuration files (instead of i.e. stupid graphical
Network Managers). That's Unix. But I am not optimistic at all
taking in care that most Linux users today have not idea that
they use Linux. An Android user doesn't care if systemd or
whatever. The same can be said about the big majority of web
server companies out there whose owner (with three or more
identities to answer tickets :-)) lies on RedHat support. This
kind of users are the target of Lennart philosophy. Quality and
money are not friends.

Back to the top: one Xfce developer answered me that I had a
"weird" and "rare" idea about what software development is.
Just because I think that a Unix graphical environment should
help and complement (instead of replace or hide) the base
system.

Until today everybody has been relatively happy; did you not use
i.e. HAL?, you removed it. Besides, it doesn't hurt to give a
Windows like desktop to an unexperienced user (or may I say a
Windows user) while this goal doesn't become a priority to the
extent to interfere or even broke things for advanced unix
users.

Anyway I feel that I am alone in this, if Linus Torvals itself
uses a desktop environment... I don't understand: why do you
install kwrite, kate, kdevelop, konsole, kmail and all their
dependencies (or their gnome counterparts) for then using Pine
and u-emacs? What do you want kalarm for having cron? Why to
have mysql running just for indexing your files having find and
grep? What do you want all that KDE stupid imitation of MacOS
Dashboard for?

What I mean is: do you like all this big graphical applications
with hundred of dependencies? Then don't argue against
dependencies in package managers. Do you prefer all those
pretty icons and graphical functionality to plain text, command
line and shell scripting? Well, don't complain about systemd.
If you want to have all you will end with nothing.
Excellent and intelligent post.
I agree with you in most ways. Which is why I still use Slackware.
Its all about productivity as Tobi agreed with me as well. Whatever helps you better is best for you.
If you want KDE with its different tiles and widgets for each work-space that is great. I truely enjoy kde for that reason even though I understand its toll on resources and dependencies needed etc. If you prefer using command line and find that more practical that is also great. I for example prefer command line over file managers it just seems easier to type then click for me. Slackware seems to have the best integration of these 2. GUI to a limited extent ease and Console for everything.
A simple system can also be very productive with less bugs and less need for support.
Now ofcorse I enjoy Fedora and CentOS for their own particular reasons as well.
Props for your post.
 
Old 08-14-2012, 06:10 PM   #125
fogpipe
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2011
Distribution: Slackware 64 -current,
Posts: 550

Rep: Reputation: 194Reputation: 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by eloi View Post
Back to the top: one Xfce developer answered me that I had a
"weird" and "rare" idea about what software development is.
Just because I think that a Unix graphical environment should
help and complement (instead of replace or hide) the base
system.

Anyway I feel that I am alone in this, if Linus Torvals itself
uses a desktop environment... I don't understand: why do you
install kwrite, kate, kdevelop, konsole, kmail and all their
dependencies (or their gnome counterparts) for then using Pine
and u-emacs? What do you want kalarm for having cron? Why to
have mysql running just for indexing your files having find and
grep? What do you want all that KDE stupid imitation of MacOS
Dashboard for?

What I mean is: do you like all this big graphical applications
with hundred of dependencies? Then don't argue against
dependencies in package managers. Do you prefer all those
pretty icons and graphical functionality to plain text, command
line and shell scripting? Well, don't complain about systemd.
If you want to have all you will end with nothing.
You arent alone in the way you use linux, i use it about the same way. I use fluxbox or blackbox, rox or some other light file manager if available and various shell scripts and terms. KDE and xfce both seem like overkill to me. One of the beautiful things about linux is its modularity and configurabilty, something that, it seems to me, is gradually less evident as time goes on.
 
Old 08-14-2012, 10:40 PM   #126
vharishankar
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2003
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 3,178
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 138Reputation: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by eloi View Post
Some years ago, based in this same argument, I told to Xfce
developers (in a mailing list) that they were making the same
mistake than Gnome and KDE developers. All desktop environments
go in the same direction to give the user a pseudo
MSWindows/MacOSX experience. Seems moved by envy: "Look, Linux
can do that!". Linux desktop ends looking like a bad copy.

I use cp, mv and rm to manage my files. I have Fvwm and some
GTK applications by desktop, I can reproduce my environment in
any Unix without loosing any feature. Yes, I live in the Stone
Age, from the Lennart "infinite and beyond" Pottering point of
view (perhaps inspired in some Linus "Species" Torvalds' bad
understood Darwinism?).

But I am not a teenager (I'm 45 years old :-)) pretending to be
a hacker or "the command line guy" or "the slacker that carry a
gun"; how much lines of code does a graphical file manager with
all its dependencies need? Layer upon layer upon layer... All
this lines of code need to be maintained. Less lines of code
means less bugs, less security holes and less man power
development. Common sense.

I dialog constantly with the system via shell scripts. Even if
you are an experienced C developer it is a good thing to use
shell scripts in the init process because its flexibility. And
it is a good idea encourage new users to learn and use the shell
and edit configuration files (instead of i.e. stupid graphical
Network Managers). That's Unix. But I am not optimistic at all
taking in care that most Linux users today have not idea that
they use Linux. An Android user doesn't care if systemd or
whatever. The same can be said about the big majority of web
server companies out there whose owner (with three or more
identities to answer tickets :-)) lies on RedHat support. This
kind of users are the target of Lennart philosophy. Quality and
money are not friends.

Back to the top: one Xfce developer answered me that I had a
"weird" and "rare" idea about what software development is.
Just because I think that a Unix graphical environment should
help and complement (instead of replace or hide) the base
system.

Until today everybody has been relatively happy; did you not use
i.e. HAL?, you removed it. Besides, it doesn't hurt to give a
Windows like desktop to an unexperienced user (or may I say a
Windows user) while this goal doesn't become a priority to the
extent to interfere or even broke things for advanced unix
users.

Anyway I feel that I am alone in this, if Linus Torvals itself
uses a desktop environment... I don't understand: why do you
install kwrite, kate, kdevelop, konsole, kmail and all their
dependencies (or their gnome counterparts) for then using Pine
and u-emacs? What do you want kalarm for having cron? Why to
have mysql running just for indexing your files having find and
grep? What do you want all that KDE stupid imitation of MacOS
Dashboard for?

What I mean is: do you like all this big graphical applications
with hundred of dependencies? Then don't argue against
dependencies in package managers. Do you prefer all those
pretty icons and graphical functionality to plain text, command
line and shell scripting? Well, don't complain about systemd.
If you want to have all you will end with nothing.
I think you are getting it slightly wrong about my views on the subject. I am not against innovation. But I am against breaking existing solutions that work well. I am also against adding abstraction where none is necessary.

I think breaking something as fundamental as the system boot initialization manager is not good. Particularly because SysVinit has been so long stable and does the job it is supposed to.

I am not against advances in the userspace and desktop areas that make life easier for the average user. In fact, I prefer those conveniences that add value and improve my workflow. But I DO think that breaking fundamental components of the system and then rebuilding is reinventing the wheel fixing bugs and then getting almost the same functionality in the end is wasteful. Particularly as attempts to "standardize" Linux till date have only led to more fragmentation.

So you are assuming a lot of things that I haven't said. My workflow demands modern desktop applications, features and functionality.

Last edited by vharishankar; 08-14-2012 at 10:52 PM.
 
Old 08-14-2012, 10:54 PM   #127
Pixxt
Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Distribution: Slackware, Debian,
Posts: 199

Rep: Reputation: 103Reputation: 103
https://plus.google.com/111104121194...ts/JmtwJwXGaCy

As shown in the above thread the philosophy behind SystemD is so short-sighted and retarded it makes me think Lennart Poettering is a troll.

But like I said before what did you expect from the same person who wrote PulseAudio?
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-14-2012, 11:23 PM   #128
the3dfxdude
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Posts: 567

Rep: Reputation: 247Reputation: 247Reputation: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pixxt View Post
https://plus.google.com/111104121194...ts/JmtwJwXGaCy

As shown in the above thread the philosophy behind SystemD is so short-sighted and retarded it makes me think Lennart Poettering is a troll.

But like I said before what did you expect from the same person who wrote PulseAudio?
Can someone explain why systemd would want /proc mounted? At what point? Would this also assume that you would need an initrd?

And yes I do know that the problem was accessing /proc/sys specifically, but introducing a direct dependency into /proc in the init scheme seems strange to me when I know it is possible to not mount it at all. In fact, I did just that when I had to "fix" udev just this weekend. I skipped the regular init and had to mount it myself.

Last edited by the3dfxdude; 08-14-2012 at 11:39 PM.
 
Old 08-15-2012, 12:06 AM   #129
ReaperX7
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Location: California
Distribution: Slackware64-Current
Posts: 6,449
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 2023Reputation: 2023Reputation: 2023Reputation: 2023Reputation: 2023Reputation: 2023Reputation: 2023Reputation: 2023Reputation: 2023Reputation: 2023Reputation: 2023
You have to admit Alan Cox in that one paragraph about halfway down the page tore systemd and Lennart completely apart and exposed it's weaknesses with lack of debugging output and inability to be useful in said debugging.

I think it's about time Lennart Poettering is completely shutdown and kicked out of Linux development with extreme prejudice.

Trying fix a wheel like sysvinit that isn't broken isn't good quality development procedures, and neither is publishing untested projects without some level of warning that it might not be stable for production level systems.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-15-2012, 04:14 AM   #130
eloi
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2010
Posts: 227

Rep: Reputation: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by vharishankar View Post
I think you are getting it slightly wrong about my views on the subject. I am not against innovation. But I am against breaking existing solutions that work well. I am also against adding abstraction where none is necessary.

I think breaking something as fundamental as the system boot initialization manager is not good. Particularly because SysVinit has been so long stable and does the job it is supposed to.

I am not against advances in the userspace and desktop areas that make life easier for the average user. In fact, I prefer those conveniences that add value and improve my workflow. But I DO think that breaking fundamental components of the system and then rebuilding is reinventing the wheel fixing bugs and then getting almost the same functionality in the end is wasteful. Particularly as attempts to "standardize" Linux till date have only led to more fragmentation.

So you are assuming a lot of things that I haven't said. My workflow demands modern desktop applications, features and functionality.
So you assumed that I assume you are against innovation :-).
To not fall in an infinite loop; could you give me an
example of some modern feature or functionality your
workflow demands? Specifically some feature that you
assumed my desktop environment as I described lacks of.
 
Old 08-15-2012, 04:19 AM   #131
lolnameless
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jan 2012
Location: Hong Kong
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 18

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
I could care less about hurr Lennart durr redhat huuu consipracy...etc.
just not waste our lifetime arguing on these things and get over the fact that all corporation is inherently evil (not to mention sysvinit is perfectly fine, there's no tension to pull us back)

so, now,i consider all discussion is worthless, just like many other things in the community..... we don't even need to forge a better strategies or whatnot, the strategy is there :

Don't use it.
 
Old 08-15-2012, 04:19 AM   #132
kikinovak
MLED Founder
 
Registered: Jun 2011
Location: Montpezat (South France)
Distribution: CentOS, OpenSUSE
Posts: 3,440

Rep: Reputation: 2108Reputation: 2108Reputation: 2108Reputation: 2108Reputation: 2108Reputation: 2108Reputation: 2108Reputation: 2108Reputation: 2108Reputation: 2108Reputation: 2108
Quote:
Originally Posted by eloi View Post
What I mean is: do you like all this big graphical applications
with hundred of dependencies? Then don't argue against
dependencies in package managers. Do you prefer all those
pretty icons and graphical functionality to plain text, command
line and shell scripting? Well, don't complain about systemd.
I don't want a GPS in my car - or on my motorbike. But I do want milk and sugar in my coffee. There's no link whatsoever between those two preferences.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-15-2012, 04:41 AM   #133
vharishankar
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2003
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 3,178
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 138Reputation: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by eloi View Post
So you assumed that I assume you are against innovation :-).
To not fall in an infinite loop; could you give me an
example of some modern feature or functionality your
workflow demands? Specifically some feature that you
assumed my desktop environment as I described lacks of.
An example which springs to mind is the convenience of graphical package managers and also automatic dependency resolution. I assume most Slackware users are against this feature, because I have heard it on this forum by a lot of Slackware users. I happen to disagree on this.

Another example is that I prefer a DE with a graphical login and integrated features such as shutdown, reboot, suspend, hibernate, display power management etc. working correctly in my laptop. It is just most convenient when the UI is power management aware - because things like display brightness, standby etc can be configured for battery and on-AC power use.

Yet another example is that I don't mind the modern approach of using a network management daemon to handle networking and internet connections rather than setting everything up in a static configuration file. For wireless connections, this is more convenient than fiddling about with wpa_supplicant and iwconfig. These userspace improvements are what I consider appropriate cases for abstraction and beneficial for desktop use.

In the application level, particularly for desktop use, I like these benefits, but the core *nix-like functionality underneath is what keeps the OS stable in the first place and it is the core *nix functionality that should be not be fiddled with or tinkered with without reasonable cause. From all that I've read about systemd so far, it appears that it is trying to make Linux more like Windows in that respect i.e. in the core system functionality.

Last edited by vharishankar; 08-15-2012 at 04:47 AM.
 
Old 08-15-2012, 05:13 AM   #134
vharishankar
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2003
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 3,178
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 138Reputation: 138
Quote:
Don't use it.
See, with userspace applications, the end user has a choice, you can either use libreoffice or koffice for example, but if a distribution chooses systemd over sysvinit there is no trivial way to change that choice for the end user. You either live with it or you are forced to use another distribution that doesn't.

Either way, it's not as simple as saying use X or Y as you please. systemd is a lower level feature that affects how the userspace works with the kernel. And is intended as a replacement for the tried and tested way of the past few decades. And more than anything, what I am wary about is that the creator of systemd seems very aggressive in pushing it as the ONLY way forward.

Last edited by vharishankar; 08-15-2012 at 05:17 AM.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-15-2012, 05:59 AM   #135
lolnameless
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jan 2012
Location: Hong Kong
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 18

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by vharishankar View Post
See, with userspace applications, the end user has a choice, you can either use libreoffice or koffice for example, but if a distribution chooses systemd over sysvinit there is no trivial way to change that choice for the end user. You either live with it or you are forced to use another distribution that doesn't.

Either way, it's not as simple as saying use X or Y as you please. systemd is a lower level feature that affects how the userspace works with the kernel. And is intended as a replacement for the tried and tested way of the past few decades. And more than anything, what I am wary about is that the creator of systemd seems very aggressive in pushing it as the ONLY way forward.
but really, is it really a reason for not to defend ourselves?
 
  


Closed Thread


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
Informaton on systemd init system? arashi256 Linux - Newbie 1 06-04-2011 07:06 PM
LXer: openSUSE 11.4 M6 Kills HAL, Brings WebYaST, Avoids SystemD LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 01-28-2011 11:50 PM
LXer: This week at LWN: Systemd and Fedora 14 LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 09-07-2010 01:00 AM
LXer: Systemd Test Day on Tuesday 2010/09/07 LXer Syndicated Linux News 5 09-06-2010 10:52 AM
About Slackware 9.1 boot disk?? ftp://ftp.kpn.be/pub/linux/slackware/slackware-9.1-is AL3OMDAH Slackware 4 04-18-2007 09:54 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:03 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
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration