Member response
 

Hi,

I agree! PV's plan has always been solid and reliable when maintaining Slackware. I really do not see Slackware's maintainer jumping off any cliffs or making system changes that would be the downfall of the best Gnu/Linux available.

Slackware has always been my choice for a UNIX-like Gnu/Linux for this very reason, stability and smart maintenance choices to provide the stable release that we all need on our machines. Simple or understandable configurations for the base system are important for admins that rely on Slackware.

PV & Team do keep available to loyal users a stable, viable thus usable Gnu/Linux. My hopes are that more users will realize that about Slackware.
Hope this helps.
Have fun & enjoy!
:hattip:

Religious guy's religious lecture
 

The limitation I observed you have in particular is that in front of a non technical approach, besides exposed in a non literal plain way, confuses you and make you think there isn't a reasoning behind.

I have nothing against Microsoft Windows, Apple or even systemd. They're just doing business and doing it well. I'm against the idiocy of consumers. Consumerism is nearly related to the religious approach. I'm against cheap hypocrisy, people pretending to defend A and doing B (and against fake people in general). I'm against ignorant FOSS developers carving their own graves trying to win the race to Microsoft in its own game; instead of improving Linux in the aspects it shines they are ruining it, of course supported by ignorant users. That's the only one reason why I mention Windows in my criticisms.

You and others here read half of the text and take conclusions based in prejudices. And brand others. That's a religious approach.

By the way, you should take a second look to that bsdnow.tv videos and see how Kris Moore is very happy about Linux users migrating to FreeBSD because of systemd. That's religious, because it doesn't defend a rational idea but just what I call a "football shirt" (modern religion). The level you're trying to downgrade my idea.

Very few people have clearly stated in this thread an intention to leave over systemd:

#4: rokytnji
#44: UnixPhilosophy
#138 astrogeek (sort of)
#359 moisespedro ("probably")
#430 itsgregman
#747 green_vein

It's arguable that #44 doesn't count (UnixPhilosophy strikes me as a troll, and possibly a sock puppet). #138, #359, and #430 are very reluctant and foot-draggy.

The overall impression I get from this thread is an almost universal unhappiness over the suggestion of systemd in Slackware, but equally ubiquitous faith in PV's choices.

Member response
 

Hi,

I am more on the philosophical(4) side with PV & Team. Not a religious(2) point but one of practical(3) system usage that best suits my needs along with the Slackware community.

Wearing my Chicago Bears gear does not make me religious to the Bears but a loyal follower of the team. Same for Slackware, support for a practical stable UNIX-Like Gnu/Linux. Zealot(1), maybe in the sense of promoting Slackware. Idolatry (2), no way! That would be sacrament(6) to my real reason of believe in God not a system nor maintainer will ever replace that for my soul.

So please do not mark us religious in our belief in Slackware as a great UNIX-Like Gnu/Linux. We are supporters of Slackware and most do have a grasp as to why they use or promote it.

I really believe this thread has varied to far from the original intent of the OP. Real Slackware users will not leave this Gnu/Linux on a whim nor for impractical additions to Gnu/Linux that will degrade the value to the base. Theoretically, a past UNIX user appreciates the continued support and growth with improvements by PV & Team. Just because some of the posters within this thread support systemd doesn't mean Slackware should follow the herd with a untested control with so many areas that should be addressed before release.

My only crashes for Slackware were self induced, as the admin I did know how to back track to a stable point.

For those that seem to want to pressure the use of systemd then I do suggest that you post elsewhere and get this thread back on topic.

Slackware herd will not follow to the kill/slaughter ahead.

Enough said!
:hattip:

Linus made a comment about systemd in that debconf14 Q&A session he did recently. Basically, it boiled down to; "While I don't like some aspects of 'systemd', as long as I can start a couple of terminals to run git in, I don't really care about the init system". From a purely practical standpoint, that seems a perfectly logical statement and it gave me something to ponder on. I don't like systemd; I think its a bad design; I think its an infrastructural land-grab and lock-in; however, from a purely practical standpoint, should I really care so long as I can start a couple of xterms to run git in? Probably not... but then, I'm the crazy sort of guy who goes through rc.S removing UUOCs because they offend my sensibilities, so I'm clearly not all there! ;)

Would I leave Slackware over systemd? I honestly have no idea. Perhaps I'd have to give it the sausage treatment: "don't think too much about the ingredients, just eat it!"

Gaining informed users is a good thing for an open source project. It opens access to potential contributors and potential funding, widens the installed base, which allows improved hardware and software support. It's making more people aware of "there is more than Linux", which is a good thing for standards and portability. Also using BSD doesn't rule out using Linux, you can indeed use both.

The only ones who don't like people contributing money, free time and code to different causes than their own are some large Linux businesses. Especially if you dare to publish source code under GPL-incompatible licenses like CDDL, you can expect some severe bullying from the "community".

That is what's making people run over to BSD (server) and OSX (desktop). Those people actually care about the whole picture. So my answer would be: While I like Unix-like operating systems (Slackware being a great implementation of one), I don't care very much about Linux. It's a replaceable kernel with an unix-like syscall interface.

If there is a "what will you do if Slackware adopts systemd?" poll, imo it should be of a "check all that apply" variety, and include at least the following behaviors seen described by participants in this thread:

* Use Slackware with systemd,

* Switch to a different Linux distribution or LFS,

* Switch to a different non-Linux operating system,

* Give Slackware with systemd a good hard try before deciding,

* Use an older version of Slackware without systemd for as long as possible,

* Use a fork of Slackware without systemd,

* Give up computers and switch to beetle-farming or something,

* It will never happen; this poll is stupid and pointless.

You can add me as a confirmed to leave if adopted. I'm already learning Free/PC-BSD to make the transition.

I had not focused on Linus' remark closely, but you are exactly correct - it was in fact a kind of breakpoint for me at which I shifted significantly further toward the "Linux may become a dead-end" mind-set.

And I agree and have said before - I run Linux because it is Unix-like, that is the value it delivers to me. If it becomes significantly non-Unix-like I am outta here, and thanks for the fish!

Here's a good point...

At what point does GNU/Linux cease to exist and become something else?

Linux became a dead-end as soon as certain thuggish bullies sought to monopolize it. systemd is just one manifestation of a pattern that has been clear for a long time. The funny thing is, the scoffers who promote certain technologies in Gnu/Linux aren't slow to abandon those projects as soon as it becomes painfully obvious they're nothing but ill-conceived and half-finished works of junk. Gnome "Classic" in RHEL 7, anyone? Or the loud-mouth proponents abandon ship and go working for Microsoft. Mono, anyone?

systemd isn't about the technical merits of an init system. It's just yet another front-line in a perennial philosophical war between those who see themselves as progressive and those they consider Luddites, holding back progress. What makes me laugh most of all is the biggest mouths in these debates often belong to those not long out of nappies when the Linux kernel, and NetBSD, and Slackware, and FreeBSD were born. Born into the Web 2.0 and smartphone era, they have no concept whatsoever of why the old ways are best, and why the old ways were designed the way they were.

It would be nice if they would stick to Ubuntu and Android and all the other touchy-feely systems they can't live without, and leave us alone, but they also seem to have a repulsive evangelical zeal which motivates them to impose their depredations on the rest of us, because, as we all know, they always know best.

Just today we hear that Europe is threatening to split Google over its monopolizing instinct. Europe fined Microsoft for the same offence.

How long before Linux is in the dock facing the same charges? In our lifetime, in my opinion.

Nobody likes bullies, and that's what this debate is about. Not the technical merits of systemd. It could be the best invention ever, but if its proponents carry on scoffing and sneering at venerable systems like Slackware and the BSDs, I solemnly swear I will never use it, and I will actively engage against it at every opportunity.

Yes, exactly. The problem of Big Business Linux is that they try to take something given away for free and turn it into a profit generator only they can control. Red Hat, Canonical, Google, etc. have all tried to capitalize off GNU/Linux. While that's all fine and dandy, and allowed by the GPL, it's when they seek to gain total control of the entire ecosystem that it becomes a problem. I could care less if good, decent, well meaning developers work at Red Hat, Canonical, Google, etc. it's the corporates who come along and try to, or successfully, destroy an ecosystem all to line their pockets with gold and use developers to push agendas forward to get that aspect of total control that a problem affects everything and everyone.

This is no way specific neither to Linux nor more generally to the IT industry. To be very profitable on a market, monopolize it. Anything new?

Agreed on pretty much every point, well said!

And especially this one...

Bullies. Tyrants. Lynch mobs and other corporate interests... call them what you will in each domain - THEY are the very thing that WE must seek to be FREE of... and it is ALL about that FREEDOM!

In reality this is just another enemy aggression, albeit a big one, in that context. And yes, I think enemy is the appropriate choice of word.

Yes, but then again, nobody stood up to Bill Gates over 86-DOS, but that was a different time, place, and situation when there was very little being done with PCs And choices were few and far between. Today, that's not the situation, it's completely reversed. Today we have a lot going on with computers and have choices, but if those choices are eroded, all that choice will evaporate and we'll be right back to few opportunities, fewer solutions, and little or no choice.