It's fine if not all parts of the UNIX philosophy are followed, but some things should be respected regardless such as Doug Mclroy's portion of writing quality software that does what it's supposed to do without feature creep. Equally, while GNU/Linux isn't always adherent to the POSIX specification as well, maintaining some level of interoperability between systems should be adhered to as well. Following philosophy and respecting philosophy are different things entirely.

As far as my stance of the knowledge issue, I only want to say this, only an ignorant fool throws away knowledge willingly, while a wise person keeps and maintains knowledge without hesitation.

1 members found this post helpful.

I was going to keep out of this topic but this just screams for a reply.

You have been beating the Unix philosophy drum for ages and now you come out with this. You can't have it both ways you know, you are not the person who gets to pick and choose for everyone else (neither are the creators of systemd). Just because you think something doesn't follow your type of Unix philosophy, that now appears to be creeping into a fence sitting philosophy on anything except systemd, doesn't mean it is bad.

Your posts until this one have always indicated it's an either or situation, someone is either Unix-philosophy or they're not, an application is either created along the lines of the Unix philosophy or not. Why are you now starting to straddle the picket fence?

There is no room for elitism. If you want Unix, and the strict Unix philosophy, use Mac OSX or a BSD. If you are happy to fence sit and use something that gets the job done on a much wider range of hardware than a BSD or doesn't become a "hackintosh", like most of us, then use Linux.

3 members found this post helpful.

An "exodus" would imply a mass departure of people. Do you have evidence of this, because if not I call bullshit. And no a couple of vocal people on a mailing list saying they might try Slackware again is not evidence that Debian users are flocking to Slackware on mass.

systemd aside, maybe they should switch to Slackware but without evidence I do not believe for a second that there is a flood of ex-Debian users over to Slackware.

5 members found this post helpful.

People who want UNIX philosophy in their software, shouldn't use any of the GNU software either, because well- GNU is not UNIX. Shouldn't use Perl ever, also any IDE. Never should think parallel and should try to save trees.
Also, shouldn't even use Linux because it was just UNIX-like, not UNIX.

If I look and dress like Gandhi, will I be supposed to act like Gandhi? F*ck no! I'm gonna make the invaders die of hunger, not myself.

All this adhering to UNIX philosophy shout out makes me wanna use Windows10 for some time and then come crying back to Linux to feel better, even if it's not UNIX.

Regards.

1 members found this post helpful.

What I personally follow and support of the UNIX philosophy is my personal preference and point of view. I don't have to agree on all points of the philosophy which is what I've always said, but its the main core universal fundamentals I think should be adhered to. If I didn't say that in plain enough English, then please by all means show your point of view as well. Likewise goes for POSIX. Even if something doesn't exactly follow a standard as law doesn't mean it can't try to achieve, meet, or exceed that standard.

What I choose as my personal preference as a system is none of your concern. You can say I'm fence sitting, but honestly, what's wrong with that? What's so bad, wrong, or evil about wanting a sane balance of quality and quantity? Everything needs balance, but that balance must be kept within reason and it is delicate. Yes, I am an elitist in that area, wanting quality in balance with quantity, that, to me, is having sanity in software. I'm likewise an elitist for maintaining knowledge and development of educational foundations built in universal fundamentals that any one can use regardless of system. Again, what's wrong with wanting better education into UNIX on the whole rather than one specific method? After all, isn't that what Slackware is about? Learning UNIX universal fundamentals and learning core, low-level GNU/Linux systems that can be used anywhere? Sorry if I take my Linux seriously, but why not?

As far as numbers of users? I honestly don't know, how can I except seeing people on LQ here say they switched? Sorry for sounding blunt but last I checked we didn't keep records of who was using what. There was an exodus, but honestly, not I, nor you, can give any accurate number on that. I didn't generalize so please, don't twist arguments to say specifics when none was given.

1 members found this post helpful.

A specific was given, by you. You said there was an "exodus" and this implies large scale movement of people movement, i.e. many. Yet you admit you do not know and cannot know how many people switched. Now let me quote you again with added bolding and emphasis:

So your evidence is based on your own statement, which you admit cannot be backed up. Nice logic!

4 members found this post helpful.

It is wrong when you have, in previous posts in various threads, consistently pushed the idea that anyone who does not dislike or avoid systemd at all costs is wrong. Or anyone who discusses their usage of systemd is pushing it at people. Some people make up their minds in their own way and don't immediately jump to the beat of your drum. Others are happy to try things out and made a decision for themselves without you forcing your POV in their faces at every opportunity. Then you tell people not to "push, pressure, and pester indirectly that Slackware, or any distribution, has to have systemd." while you consistently push that no distribution should have it.

Now you are trying to look like you are the voice of reason and sanity and everyone else is ganging up against you when in actual fact you have been the hard core militant and others have been the fence sitters patiently letting you post your diatribes without much fanfare. Do you still not see what's wrong with your change of tack? Why is it ok for you to be a fence sitter but no one else is allowed to be?

7 members found this post helpful.

As big be the number of people using it, the expression "UNIX Philosophy" is not a proper appellation of what is actually just a set of guidelines for operating or more generally computer systems engineering.

5 members found this post helpful.

I don't see Slackware in your list of systems. Is that an oversight on your part?

3 members found this post helpful.

I never said anything about who was allowed to be what so please try to twist the argument again, please. The only pushing for systemd have been the obvious fanbois who jump when anyone even mentions systemd and then start in on anyone trying to say, "stop, let's think about this" and how many people actually dare push back? One person? Maybe a handful at best? Well pardon me if I actually give a shit about doing things the right way, and not the haphazard and fix it later way. I'm not the people who brings up every talking point Lennart claims is his own version of truth as undeniable fact when none of what he says has ever been proven fact? I'm one of few people vocally saying, "wait a minute, let's re-read that a bit more carefully before we continue".

Is it wrong for me to have an opinion on something? Is it wrong to you and others when I'm flexible on a few points, but yet you dare to say to me, "be more flexible Reaper! You don't have to be so inflexible!" Make up your mind. You think I don't like progress, but damn! Is it wrong to take progress slowly, carefully, methodically, and sanely? Apparently so with some of the crowd here.

The only thing i've pointed out is that after nearly 20+ years people are so willing to not just break a working model, but grind to a halt and destroy years of knowledge, education, and wisdom all in the name of progress, and where any one of us could be headed. All I pointed out was if the unthinkable occured, I could safely transition to another system by using the universal knowledge I acquired from Slackware that is not found in other distributions, or is rapidly disappearing altogether, and that throwing that knowledge away for a system that is anti-cross-platform in education and knowledge is completely foolish. Knowledge and education like that provided by Slackware, even if it wasn't Patrick's original intention, should be preserved by all means, even with a working design model.

I'm getting back on the topic my next post, so please, if you feel I'm any level of "wrong" in your eyes, discuss it with me in private, or hold your peace by all means please.

2 members found this post helpful.

Which is a systemd distribution.

Do you see Slackware in the list of everyone who is taking part in this topic? No, I didn't think so.

I used it for a while alongside Debian, but now run Debian and LFS (LFS replaced the Slackware partition). Slackware is good but it's not the be all and end all for me.

So technically you've moved on, then, and to a systemd distribution no less. So if Slackware isn't your "end-all" how can you bring an argument about what we who still use Slackware with any level of relevancy? You've made your decision.

I too use LFS, but Slackware still exists on my box as the host when I build things in chroot. Just because it's unlisted doesn't mean squat. Maybe I just don't feel like adding it to the list.

1 members found this post helpful.

"Me too"

It's funny how people who bang on about Unix philosophy never include AT&T's hideous maneuvers and the divisiveness of the UNIX wars: but Unix was born that way, the dark side of the force has reasserted itself regularly, and it looks to me that this is exactly the scenario that is replaying once more as an inherent consequence of the corporate takeover of Linux development.

But what do I know. I'm a Multician, not a Unix hippie.

5 members found this post helpful.

Important part first.
So you can tell everyone else in public when they are "wrong" in you eyes but the rest of us are now required to discuss your "wrongs" in private. Nope not going to happen. This black duck ain't jumping to the beat of your drum.

Just LOL. Did you see the part I quoted from you in another thread. You didn't say "let's re-read that a bit more carefully" you flat out told the OP and anyone else who wants to discuss systemd in a calm and rational manner not to "push, pressure, and pester indirectly that Slackware, or any distribution, has to have systemd."

Another just LOL moment. You're a barrel of laughs now aren't you. you appear to be suggesting you are the ultimate victim now. Someone posted he tried systemd in Slackware and you hijacked his thread. He gave his appraisal and you started telling him what he needed to do. You weren't calm and rational. You keep posting about the Unix philosophy how it should be adhered to yet when it suits you in a different thread it doesn't have to be. Is it wrong for me to point out the glaring problem here?

So all you are pointing out is Slackware is the last bastion of common sense in the Unix philosophy world. Problem with that is Linux is not Unix but Linux has a fundamental thing called freedom of choice, see if you can get that with Mac OSX? If people don't like what their distribution is doing they can voice concern or move on to another one that is more aligned to their way of thinking.

I just don't see why you think you need to hijack every systemd thread. We all know what you think and we all respect your choice to think that, we even respect you for having your opinion. However it would be really nice to be able to discuss systemd without you hijacking the majority of the discussions and then claiming you are the victim. A nice calm rational discussion is all, I think (yes personal opinion) the vast majority of us want. Can you manage that? if you can please do. I, personally, look forward to the absolute font of knowledge you have learned through Slackware being shared in a calm and rational manner.

2 members found this post helpful.