Interesting bit about the GNOME project. I listened to an interview with Lennart Poettering where he said he also wants to start the KDE and GNOME session via systemd, so that you can use one component of KDE, and the other from GNOME, and both would run in the same session. Have these plans been abandoned? A quick search lead me to https://wiki.gnome.org/ThreePointThi...emdUserSession:

No the real problem is posting of false information as fact without ever bothering to check it or say that it may not be correct but rather it is just an opinion. As for proclaiming to be an expert I have not done that but what I did do is post a link to information that shows the post I corrected was indeed incorrect. I will continue to do that if the post I am correcting is misleading or makes something look bad for the purpose of the post. Like many I'm self taught with regards to Linux, if you want me to post credentials from an educational institute it wont happen because I don't have any.

Where are all these topics wanting Slackware to be more like other distributions? People may be making suggestions about different things they, personally, feel would be helpful and I see nothing wrong with that. However I don't remember seeing any great number of topics saying Slackware should be like Fedora.
I'm not trolling you I'm correcting you or getting you to back up your statements the exact same way I have disproved a few of them.
Now we have a plea based on emotions. Apart from our posts at LQ I don't know you and you don't know me. You could be the nicest fella on the planet or my worst enemy it wont change anything because we have no idea who each other really is. All I am doing is correcting you when you make glaring mistakes or suggesting to you that your posts have no factual basis but are, instead, based on emotions and are telling others what they can and cannot do. You have my permission to do it to me if you so choose, I wont call you a troll just because you disagree with me.

4 members found this post helpful.

OK people.

NOW HEAR THIS CFB: get this thread back on topic.
If you want to fight then use facts.
No more troll calling or whatever else nasty.

Next one who "doesn't get it" gets my special attention.

CLEAR?


//I'll close this thread for 8 hours before re-opening it to let this message sink in.

1 members found this post helpful.

I'd prefer you keep it closed, mod. I think the outrageous behavior here (as well as in that other thread calling for bodily harm) is just fodder for more trolling than actual discussion, people have derailed it, and will derail it again, ad infinitum.

Maybe wordfilter systemd == shitposting and ad hominems, board-wide, if this were a *chan.

1 members found this post helpful.

As touchy a subject as it is, and I've even said the same zakame, censorship isn't productive.

Example: A certain few developers are openly known to censor their blogs but LQ is about open discussion, and whether or not that discussion is good, bad, or ugly, then eventual outcome allows, if possible, people to air out feelings. Control is needed, but censoring is a slippery slope, and while nice it may seem at first, over time, it can be counter-productive, harmful, and determintal to progress.

2 members found this post helpful.

Censorship is a good thing, look how happy with it those in charge of; the inquisition, witch burners, book burners, fascists etc were. It got things done their way and got it done fast. /sarcasm

As far as leaving Slackware over another init system, after some thinking, I have to say that if systemd was deployed, I'd probably still leave. To me, and this is my point of view, to include systemd seems like a complete step away from everything that makes Slackware what it is. In fact, stepping away from the bsd style sysv implementation Slackware uses for any init system just seems a step in the wrong direction. I would say if the bsd style sysv implementation was altered to use inittab more that would be an example of addressing issues such as faster start ups. One of our members here posted a way to move the cache update scripts into there own inittab triggered script, how come we couldn't use more? I would stay for that because it's still following the principles of Slackware, just tweaking the implementation. After all sysvinit is a program, but it's also a specification as well, and specifications can be tweaked. One shot services without dependencies could be loaded by inittab and services with dependencies could be loaded by several scripts in their own branch of the service tree. To me, that just feels more like "The Slackware way" and familiar.

1 members found this post helpful.

The conversation, painful as it is, has merit. Shutting it down won't solve anything.

While a 6.5 second boot time is certainly impressive, none of the other arguments for systemd are persuasive enough to me.

Integration of something like this into a desktop environment is simply not necessary, and adds a layer of complication which removes flexibility and control without adding any functionality. This goes against the "keep it simple" philosophy, and against my grain.

2 members found this post helpful.

Vanilla packages + stable versioning of packages + Slackware's package management is IMO far more important to Slackware's identity than the init. As long as those three things stay the same, I'll stick around :-)

How many times do I have to say this before you get it? Increased boot speed is NOT a goal of the systemd project. It's a side-effect of how it does things! You make it seem as if all we did was make Slackware boot quickly, then there'd be no reason to use systemd.

7 members found this post helpful.

It may not be a goal, but it is interesting that it is the only supposed benefit systemd supporters gleefully, and often, declare as a reason to adopt it. But then, most people still think systemd is only an init process. The good news is, most Slackware users would still be happy with Slack and continue using it. (Damn! I cannot insert a smiley-face.)

2 members found this post helpful.

I understand. I do respect your point of view. I will stay with Slackware if Pat decides to deploy systemd. That would not be a deal breaker for me. Open source is all about choice. Each to his/her own.

I simply would not upgrade to "Slackware" version CoreOS. That means

• I would not start leave Slackware / start distrohopping.
• I would not use Poetteringware nonetheless.

It's a choice some people want you to believe you not have.

2 members found this post helpful.

At first I was like many people here and I would follow Pat's decision. Now however, if systemd ever gets to Slackware I will probably leave it too.

I agree.

If Pat feels that he must adopt systemd then I will stay with the last non-systemd Slackware as long as possible**. I expect that could be a very long time if need be. If enough users choose to do that, and communicate as we are doing here, that might just lead to a de facto fork of sorts. If Pat remains on board with systemd-free Slackware, with or without a fork, then it would be the best of all possible outcomes - my first choice!

There would be no point in distrohopping... to what? Slackware or *BSD, or sit back, grab a book and watch the world burn...

The only workable alternative would be a BSD, and I am already hardening my own usage by integrating FreeBSD in case it should be necessary to fully switch in future.

It is not only a choice they do not want you to know that you have, it is a choice they do not want you to have at all! It is important to keep that choice viable, in more ways than one.

**To be fair, I would first try Slackware with systemd in fairness to Pat if for no other reason - if anyone can make it acceptable it would be Pat. But I am not hopeful of that path - Poetteringware is simply not on my own horizon either.

4 members found this post helpful.