systemd seems to be heading toward incorporating 'mount' and possibly fdisk(IIRC). I'm just waiting to hear that the shell will also be taken over by systemd-related progs. Heck, rolling Gnome in there is only logical if you follow that path. Still, I think the kernel itself has a lot of jealous defenders who will resist, greatly, the incorporation of systemd in the kernel itself. I could be wrong though -for years we heard how bootsplash would never be incorporated in the kernel -jpeg interpretor too big, what has image projection to do in the kernel, etc. Now we have *lots* of video stuff in the kernel KMS, etc.

Still, since any systemd-ized system will need an initrd to do anything outside the scope of systemd, then the kernel itself will need to support basic booting without systemd. The scary thing is that 'the scope of systmd' seems to be a (fast) moving target. I run my own home-grown system, so I'm not directly affected by what any distro does. I don't need or use systemd, any of the *Kits, dbus, or any other bloaty crap. I also don't use or need any DE either with hundreds of dependent packages. I'm perfectly happy to piece together my 'desktop' from as many, or few, components as suits me.

1 members found this post helpful.

I remember when upstart was being discussed, then systemd came along and they seem to prefer that. I don't think it's going into Debian [as the default init] any time soon, but in the future...

As long as Debian takes the GNU/kfreebsd and GNU/Hurd projects serious there is no way for them to switch to systemd. Since most distros out there are either derivatives of Debian or Ubuntu (I don't have any numbers on that, but I would guess that more than 50% are, with a userbase that is far larger than 50%), do we really have to fear a take over from systemd anywhere but in RPM distros and Arch?
(By the way, systemd in the debian repos is currently even in unstable at version 44, far from being in sync with upstream).

1 members found this post helpful.

Considering the amount of tweaking I do, and the amount of packages I leave off, I think you're 'at' where I'm heading. How much customisation one can do before it can no longer be called Slackware is something I've mused on before, but I'm still no closer to an answer on that one.

Technically, once you've changed the hostname from 'darkstar' to anything else it ceases to be Slackware, LOL. But from the looks of it around here, even if you bootstrap and build another system completely, it never ceases to be a cheap nock-off of Slackware. Following that logic, Slackware should really advertise itself as 'based on Software Landing System'... LOL LOL

I wasn't the one who got on an interview and stated after I was told "Slackware hasn't accepted systemd, yet", with the narcissist-egocentrically comment, "Oh God..." as if Slackware, the oldest currently maintained distribution of Linux, turned down "God's gift" to Linux. Lennart put the knife to our throats first buddy, so it was only fair we get to baseball bat him in the nads as needed.

Humans are a whacky and crazy bunch...

Yes, Debian and Gentoo both will probably never incorporate systemd in any regards. Slackware and LFS probably won't be incorporating it either due to the bloat it creates also.

With the rate of non-Linux kernels and operating systems like HURD, Illumos, BSD, and other kernels are going into heavy levels of development thanks to sponsorships from Google, such as Google's Summer of Code in which many projects go into extensive levels of development and research, as well as a lot of progress being made across the non-Linux UNIX/BSD world, chances are we could actually see more non-GNU/Linux operating systems become more and more relevant to the world of IT at large.

If this is the case, sysvinit might be going to probably be granted major overhauls and updates, or focus could be given to sysvinit compatible init systems like bsdinit, OpenRC, and even Upstart.

I guess to turn the tables on Lennart one could say, "Systemd just isn't relevant anymore to the development of Linux."

I have not seen that Lennart Poettering got personal on Slackware users or PV, so why feel people the need to get personal on him. Because he doesn't like the way your favorite OS works?
By the way, the "Oh God" from Lennart Poettering was not at all about Slackware accepting systemd or not, it was what he said as someone pointed out to him that Slackware has neither Gnome nor Vala in the repositories and that there were at that point problems with some Vala parts. After this comment that you feel "put the knife to our throats" (it didn't to mine, so the our in that sentence can't be valid) he helped that developer to fix the issues without any further comment about Slackware.
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archive...ay/000014.html

2 members found this post helpful.

The comment in question was in reply to someone else, so perhaps the use of "our" in that context could be valid. You are, of course and as you have done, able to declare that you do not wish to be included in that group of people.

Common English, as you are well aware, is not as precise as German.

Which seems overly dramatic. I can't see the BDFL ever incorporating it, so this really is a non issue and Poettering can say what he likes.

While I agree that the discussion has to remain factual, I must confess that in the particular case of Mister Poettering, it's difficult to watch a whole online interview with the guy without feeling a pressing urge of splashing a cream cake in his face.

"BSD is completely irreleblblblblblpfffrrr..."

3 members found this post helpful.

"Debian/kFreeBSD is a toy OS." (Lennart Poettering, interview with LinuxFR.org)

2 members found this post helpful.

The link for those that want it: http://linuxfr.org/nodes/86687/comments/1249943

Yes it does seem a little arrogant, though I don't think he's the only person out there who thinks the kFreeBSD port is a something akin to a "toy OS". Surely he's entitled to his opinion like anyone else? I don't see much justification for the witch-hunt.

The English language is as precise as any other; it only needs to be used and interpreted with precision. Indeed, the word "our" is quite well defined. It refers to oneself and at least one other person. It does not always mean "everyone," or even "everyone who uses Slackware." As languages go, this is quite standard for a plural pronoun.

In the above context, which as you correctly pointed out was a response to someone else, the possible meanings would be: ReaperX7 and the person he was responding to, ReaperX7 and someone we don't know about (sloppy usage), or one of the above "everyones." But the last possibility is in fact much less precise than the first. Furthermore, the ambiguity present in this interpretation would exist in any one of the many languages I have studied (which do not include German yet, unfortunately, but my grandmother speaks perfect German and she says it is there too).

The error does not stem from a deficiency in English or even from the usage, but rather from an (understandable) assumption in the interpretation.

I must admit I don't 'get' the debian kFreeBSD port either. If you want to run a *BSD then run a *BSD.

an init system depending on vala why not libreoffice? LOL