[gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
The 25/03/14, J. Roeleveld wrote: It has already been determined that on this list we do not want extra CCs, I think you have determined this on your side (I'm not doing a personal attack, you is not you alone). Please respect that and don't reopen this discussion. Please don't tell us what we should do in the first place. You (including some others here) seem well comfortable with the idea of making Gentoo's mailing lists an exception with the glitchy way everyone is supposed to work with mails here. cc'ing is a mark of respect in accordance with both the technical norme and the persons involved in a discussion. You won't remove this from my education and local policies instored by legitimate (or not) policymakers won't change my practice and expectation. -- Nicolas Sebrecht
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Nicolas Sebrecht nsebre...@piing.fr wrote: The 25/03/14, J. Roeleveld wrote: It has already been determined that on this list we do not want extra CCs, I think you have determined this on your side (I'm not doing a personal attack, you is not you alone). What usually happens in the gentoo users mailing list is that a bunch of old fogies get set in their ways and project their preferences onto everybody else. Just that they're the noisiest old fogies - the vast majority of mailing list members probably just subscribe to listen for potential gotchas in their installs / upgrades and never chime in on matters of opinion, in part because of how mean the list can be. I wouldn't be surprised if most users really just don't give an awk about this discussion for or against. I've never seen the extra cc nonsense written or even remotely hinted at anywhere except by a handful of whiners, so I don't think it's the majority opinion and neither should you. -- This email is:[ ] actionable [ ] fyi[x] social Response needed: [ ] yes [x] up to you [ ] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate[ ] soon [x] none
[gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
The 21/03/14, Tom Wijsman wrote: On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 07:10:49 -0500 Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: So let's get this straight. You want most everyone on this list to change what they have to do to remove dups caused by you, instead of you changing what you do to fix the problem? Everyone else is okay with it, as only one in a thousand speaks up about it; the problem rather is with that 0.1% than that it is with me, as I just use mailing lists as they are supposed to be used. Yes. I want to be cc'ed on threads I'm involved in. That's just how it should be done and what almost everybody expects on technical mailing lists. -- Nicolas Sebrecht
[gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
The 21/03/14, Dale wrote: Tom Wijsman wrote: On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 12:41:03 -0500 Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: FYI. Most people don't say anything, they just blacklist you. After that, you don't exist to them. Yes, that's up to those few; it could happen, but most respond instead. I just read the last message from you Tom. Good bye. Heh. Blacklisting just make things even worse because you won't blacklist other contributors responding to Tom. So, you'll have broken and partial threads. -- Nicolas Sebrecht
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Tue, March 25, 2014 16:35, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: The 21/03/14, Tom Wijsman wrote: On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 07:10:49 -0500 Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: So let's get this straight. You want most everyone on this list to change what they have to do to remove dups caused by you, instead of you changing what you do to fix the problem? Everyone else is okay with it, as only one in a thousand speaks up about it; the problem rather is with that 0.1% than that it is with me, as I just use mailing lists as they are supposed to be used. Yes. I want to be cc'ed on threads I'm involved in. That's just how it should be done and what almost everybody expects on technical mailing lists. Nicolas, It has already been determined that on this list we do not want extra CCs, Please respect that and don't reopen this discussion. -- Joost
[gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 06:37:20 -0400 Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 3/20/2014 5:48 PM, »Q« boxc...@gmx.net wrote: Why should Gentoo have a default? Defaults are always a good idea - as long as they are reasonable and rational. In that case, Gentoo is missing a lot of good things, from a default system logger to a default desktop environment. AFAICS, the benefit of defaults, provided they're reasonable, is that they remove the burden of making choices from the user. But I keep reading that Gentoo is all about user choice. ISTM the only good reason is that not having a default would make the documentation a lot more complicated. Documentation, *and* the install process itself. I'm not seeing that at all.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 25/03/2014 22:08, »Q« wrote: On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 06:37:20 -0400 Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 3/20/2014 5:48 PM, »Q« boxc...@gmx.net wrote: Why should Gentoo have a default? Defaults are always a good idea - as long as they are reasonable and rational. In that case, Gentoo is missing a lot of good things, from a default system logger to a default desktop environment. AFAICS, the benefit of defaults, provided they're reasonable, is that they remove the burden of making choices from the user. But I keep reading that Gentoo is all about user choice. You are conflating two things, it's actually quite disingenuous. Gentoo provides choice so you can do what you want. That doesn't preclude providing a default that suits people who see no need to make *that* choice for *them*, particularly when the thing being chosen is necessary or almost so. ISTM the only good reason is that not having a default would make the documentation a lot more complicated. Documentation, *and* the install process itself. I'm not seeing that at all. You have to have *something* to be pid 1. the stage 3 might as well provide one of those somethings that suits the common case You can make it /bin/bash if you want, but that would be a very niche usage. The large majority of new installs will want a conventional init system whether SysVinit-based or systemd based. Traditionally SysVinit was the only real contender and baselayout/openerc were originally written for Gentoo. So those are still the defaults. Without a default, the user must set one up manually for things to work at all on first reboot. The install docs try hard to get the user through the necessary steps to get a bootable system, a lot of effort went into making the steps to accomplish that fewer, no more -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
[gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 00:25:26 +0200 Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On 25/03/2014 22:08, »Q« wrote: On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 06:37:20 -0400 Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 3/20/2014 5:48 PM, »Q« boxc...@gmx.net wrote: Why should Gentoo have a default? Defaults are always a good idea - as long as they are reasonable and rational. In that case, Gentoo is missing a lot of good things, from a default system logger to a default desktop environment. AFAICS, the benefit of defaults, provided they're reasonable, is that they remove the burden of making choices from the user. But I keep reading that Gentoo is all about user choice. You are conflating two things, it's actually quite disingenuous. Gentoo provides choice so you can do what you want. That doesn't preclude providing a default that suits people who see no need to make *that* choice for *them*, particularly when the thing being chosen is necessary or almost so. Of course it doesn't preclude that; I'm sorry if implied that it did. ISTM the only good reason is that not having a default would make the documentation a lot more complicated. Documentation, *and* the install process itself. I'm not seeing that at all. You have to have *something* to be pid 1. the stage 3 might as well provide one of those somethings that suits the common case You can make it /bin/bash if you want, but that would be a very niche usage. The large majority of new installs will want a conventional init system whether SysVinit-based or systemd based. Traditionally SysVinit was the only real contender and baselayout/openerc were originally written for Gentoo. So those are still the defaults. Without a default, the user must set one up manually for things to work at all on first reboot. The install docs try hard to get the user through the necessary steps to get a bootable system, a lot of effort went into making the steps to accomplish that fewer, no more Requiring the fewest possible number of choices to get to a bootable system is a much better argument for a default than defaults are always good.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 26/03/2014 01:34, »Q« wrote: On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 00:25:26 +0200 Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On 25/03/2014 22:08, »Q« wrote: On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 06:37:20 -0400 Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 3/20/2014 5:48 PM, »Q« boxc...@gmx.net wrote: Why should Gentoo have a default? Defaults are always a good idea - as long as they are reasonable and rational. In that case, Gentoo is missing a lot of good things, from a default system logger to a default desktop environment. AFAICS, the benefit of defaults, provided they're reasonable, is that they remove the burden of making choices from the user. But I keep reading that Gentoo is all about user choice. You are conflating two things, it's actually quite disingenuous. Gentoo provides choice so you can do what you want. That doesn't preclude providing a default that suits people who see no need to make *that* choice for *them*, particularly when the thing being chosen is necessary or almost so. Of course it doesn't preclude that; I'm sorry if implied that it did. ISTM the only good reason is that not having a default would make the documentation a lot more complicated. Documentation, *and* the install process itself. I'm not seeing that at all. You have to have *something* to be pid 1. the stage 3 might as well provide one of those somethings that suits the common case You can make it /bin/bash if you want, but that would be a very niche usage. The large majority of new installs will want a conventional init system whether SysVinit-based or systemd based. Traditionally SysVinit was the only real contender and baselayout/openerc were originally written for Gentoo. So those are still the defaults. Without a default, the user must set one up manually for things to work at all on first reboot. The install docs try hard to get the user through the necessary steps to get a bootable system, a lot of effort went into making the steps to accomplish that fewer, no more Requiring the fewest possible number of choices to get to a bootable system is a much better argument for a default than defaults are always good. Yes, defaults make the most sense when you have virtuals, or when you must have 1 thing out of a range of things. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 3/20/2014 5:48 PM, »Q« boxc...@gmx.net wrote: Why should Gentoo have a default? Defaults are always a good idea - as long as they are reasonable and rational. ISTM the only good reason is that not having a default would make the documentation a lot more complicated. Documentation, *and* the install process itself.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 06:37:20 -0400 Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 3/20/2014 5:48 PM, »Q« boxc...@gmx.net wrote: Why should Gentoo have a default? Defaults are always a good idea - as long as they are reasonable and rational. Depends on how you think about it; one could claim a DE as default as reasonable and rational going one way, one could also claim something like LFS or stage1 or so to be reasonable and rational. I think the init system, as it becomes more of a choice, is on the edge here... ISTM the only good reason is that not having a default would make the documentation a lot more complicated. Documentation, *and* the install process itself. It's just one extra choice; so, that takes maybe a few minutes. It's a choice one would have to eventually make anyway; so, better do it early and have it right at once instead of having to do a more complicated migration later on. -- With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : tom...@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 09:07:17 +0100 Nicolas Sebrecht nsebre...@piing.fr wrote: I don't know the code, sorry. Since I've already tried the 'eselect init' command, I'm pretty sure it doesn't install anything. While you might be able to code it to do such thing, it probably shouldn't; it's a tool for selecting from multiple runtime things, that it would (un)install something as part of it would be odd, kind of makes one remember the UNIX philosophy of doing one thing right. -- With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : tom...@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D
[gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 22:15:32 +0100 Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote: On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 02:27:11 +0600 Andrew Savchenko birc...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 21:00:27 +0100 Tom Wijsman wrote: OpenRC is default in Gentoo now, and it is my best hope it will be. Do you have a source that backs up this claim? http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-amd64.xml?part=1chap=6 That is documentation; it being listed as a default there is by the consequence of it having been present there, whether it is decided to be the default is another story (not found grepping council meetings). Why should Gentoo have a default? ISTM the only good reason is that not having a default would make the documentation a lot more complicated.
[gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
The 26/02/14, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: Sabayon uses binary packages, isn't? Yes. Then eselect perhaps uninstalls some packages and installs others? I don't know the code, sorry. Since I've already tried the 'eselect init' command, I'm pretty sure it doesn't install anything. I've no idea; I've never used Sabayon, although I'm interested in trying it. BTW, I'm pretty sure Fabio (cc'ed) will be fine to explain how he implemented the eselect init command and the whole magic behind it. ,-) -- Nicolas Sebrecht
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
Am 21.02.2014 23:43, schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés: And now with 209 there is a new systemd-networkd deamon that is started by default even if not configured or used. http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTYxMTI $ ./configure --help | grep networkd --disable-networkd disable networkd It can be disabled. I run systemd-210 here already and have nothing like networkd running. I didn't disable it myself, maybe the devs (upstream or gentoo) did so per default. Regards, Stefan
[gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
The 20/02/14, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: Thinking about this more, since apparently using a separate profile may just be 'overkill', how about something simpler, like, for example, using eselect... Something like: # eselect init list Available init systems: [1] OpenRC * [2] systemd [3] runit (whatever choices are supported). Or am I just being ridiculous? The eselect command is already there in Sabayon. No, yo are not; but the switching requires reemerging things because you need to set some USE flags and quit others. That's the difficult (which is not, really) part; if you set the USE flags yourself or via a profile, or an eselect module, I don't think the difference matters at all. ... but I have no idea how it is done. That's why I asked what packages would require a reinstall (got no precise answer for now). -- Nicolas Sebrecht
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 4:03 AM, Nicolas Sebrecht nsebre...@piing.fr wrote: The 20/02/14, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: Thinking about this more, since apparently using a separate profile may just be 'overkill', how about something simpler, like, for example, using eselect... Something like: # eselect init list Available init systems: [1] OpenRC * [2] systemd [3] runit (whatever choices are supported). Or am I just being ridiculous? The eselect command is already there in Sabayon. No, yo are not; but the switching requires reemerging things because you need to set some USE flags and quit others. That's the difficult (which is not, really) part; if you set the USE flags yourself or via a profile, or an eselect module, I don't think the difference matters at all. ... but I have no idea how it is done. That's why I asked what packages would require a reinstall (got no precise answer for now). Sabayon uses binary packages, isn't? Then eselect perhaps uninstalls some packages and installs others? I've no idea; I've never used Sabayon, although I'm interested in trying it. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 21/02/2014 09:03, Yuri K. Shatroff wrote:
Your idea instantly fails as the rc-service author has no idea of what
you defined ${SERVICE} to be and no way to determine what it is now.
Yes, the rc-service author does not have any idea because he is not
requested to.
${SERVICE} obviously comes from `rc-service status ${SERVICE}` .
The result (e.g. tail -n {$LINES} ${SERVICE}.log) is achieved by:
1. putting LINES= in /etc/conf.d/${SERVICE}
2. setting up ${SERVICE}.log with syslog. (or putting LOGFILE=... and
doing `tail -n ${LINES} ${LOGFILE}, or even LAST_LOG_CMD=`mysql -qe
'SELECT ... FROM log.log ORDER BY date DESC LIMIT ${LINES}'`, or
*whatever*)
3. adding this `tail -n ...` or whatever call to the init script .
4. voila.
If you feel I'm again entirely wrong please point out why.
The faults with your comments are many, and I'm not going to detail them
as that's not my job. I'm going to let you figure it out for yourself in
production why your entire approach is wrong, and simply leave you with
this:
You violate DRY.
You expect the sysadmin to know they must make changes in a restart
config file when they tweak the syslogger so that somehow the init
script continues to get it right. Trust me, sysadmins are not going to
remember to do that, because expecting them to is off the wall crazy.
I repeat what I and Canek said earlier:
You've never actually DONE any of this in real life, right?
--
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
21.02.2014 12:48, Alan McKinnon пишет:
On 21/02/2014 09:03, Yuri K. Shatroff wrote:
Your idea instantly fails as the rc-service author has no idea of what
you defined ${SERVICE} to be and no way to determine what it is now.
Yes, the rc-service author does not have any idea because he is not
requested to.
${SERVICE} obviously comes from `rc-service status ${SERVICE}` .
The result (e.g. tail -n {$LINES} ${SERVICE}.log) is achieved by:
1. putting LINES= in /etc/conf.d/${SERVICE}
2. setting up ${SERVICE}.log with syslog. (or putting LOGFILE=... and
doing `tail -n ${LINES} ${LOGFILE}, or even LAST_LOG_CMD=`mysql -qe
'SELECT ... FROM log.log ORDER BY date DESC LIMIT ${LINES}'`, or
*whatever*)
3. adding this `tail -n ...` or whatever call to the init script .
4. voila.
If you feel I'm again entirely wrong please point out why.
The faults with your comments are many, and I'm not going to detail them
as that's not my job. I'm going to let you figure it out for yourself in
production why your entire approach is wrong, and simply leave you with
this:
You violate DRY.
For an example showing the general possibility to do this, I don't
violate anything. One could easily grep a syslog config , or do the
opposite (a syslog config generator from service configs), whatever. Of
course I didn't write a complete logging-aware init scripts system
because it's also not my job. But if it were, I'm pretty sure it's
doable under SysV/BSD init in compliance with DRY and ease-of-use for
admins. I'm sorry I couldn't convince you of that.
You expect the sysadmin to know they must make changes in a restart
config file when they tweak the syslogger so that somehow the init
script continues to get it right. Trust me, sysadmins are not going to
remember to do that, because expecting them to is off the wall crazy.
I repeat what I and Canek said earlier:
You've never actually DONE any of this in real life, right?
What exactly?
No, I didn't tweak any init system to print the last N log entries for a
service. No, because I don't need it and never did.
I *did* set up logging to a remote DB on SunOS and FreeBSD. But actually
you're digressing and just going personal, because the question wasn't
*how to setup logging* but *the possibility* of such a modification that
*prints the last N log entries* in the service status cmd.
--
Regards,
Yuri K. Shatroff
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 2014-02-20 9:39 PM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: Indeed, Greg doesn't work for Red Hat. Prior to working for LF, however, he worked for Novell, another for-profit Linux company. Good god, is that the best you can do? What is your aversion to 'profit', anyway? You do realize that *everyone* operates under the profit motive, right? EVERYONE. All day. Every day, in everything that they do. It may not always be a *financial* profit motive, but in many or even most cases it ultimately is.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 02/21/2014 07:24 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: On 2014-02-20 9:39 PM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: Indeed, Greg doesn't work for Red Hat. Prior to working for LF, however, he worked for Novell, another for-profit Linux company. Good god, is that the best you can do? What is your aversion to 'profit', anyway? You do realize that *everyone* operates under the profit motive, right? EVERYONE. All day. Every day, in everything that they do. It may not always be a *financial* profit motive, but in many or even most cases it ultimately is. This discussion has nothing to do with me.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 2014-02-21 8:34 AM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: On 02/21/2014 07:24 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: On 2014-02-20 9:39 PM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: Indeed, Greg doesn't work for Red Hat. Prior to working for LF, however, he worked for Novell, another for-profit Linux company. Good god, is that the best you can do? What is your aversion to 'profit', anyway? You do realize that *everyone* operates under the profit motive, right? EVERYONE. All day. Every day, in everything that they do. It may not always be a *financial* profit motive, but in many or even most cases it ultimately is. This discussion has nothing to do with me. So stop making comments in this thread. Or are you suggesting that I mis-attributed that post (I just dbl-checked and I didn't)?
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 2014-02-20 7:08 PM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: By striking the weakest part of the stack (sysv probably*did* need a good replacement, but not one as ambitious as systemd) and digging down into the kernel level (kdbus), Red Hat devs will now have a very influential role in the FOSS world. This will in turn generate interest (and thus profit) in Red Hat. I sure wish someone who has Linus' ear would ask him to post a blog (or even lkml post) dissecting this entire systemd question. Or, if anyone on here is a member of the lkml and is brave enough, post a question there asking for opinions from Linus and any other kernel dev who wishes to rant about it... As it stands now, for me, I don't see a real problem anymore...
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 02/21/2014 07:43 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: On 2014-02-21 8:34 AM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: On 02/21/2014 07:24 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: On 2014-02-20 9:39 PM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: Indeed, Greg doesn't work for Red Hat. Prior to working for LF, however, he worked for Novell, another for-profit Linux company. Good god, is that the best you can do? What is your aversion to 'profit', anyway? You do realize that *everyone* operates under the profit motive, right? EVERYONE. All day. Every day, in everything that they do. It may not always be a *financial* profit motive, but in many or even most cases it ultimately is. This discussion has nothing to do with me. So stop making comments in this thread. Or are you suggesting that I mis-attributed that post (I just dbl-checked and I didn't)? I certainly wrote what you quoted, but I'm not taking the bait to devolve this already heated discussion into personal attacks. If you think all profit is the same, then we are talking on two different wavelengths.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 2014-02-21 8:54 AM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: If you think all profit is the same, then we are talking on two different wavelengths. I didn't say that. I said that *everyone* operates under the profit motive.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Fri, 21 Feb 2014 09:03:47 -0500 Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 2014-02-21 8:54 AM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: If you think all profit is the same, then we are talking on two different wavelengths. I didn't say that. I said that *everyone* operates under the profit motive. And that is simply not true.
OT: 'profit motive' - WAS Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 2014-02-21 10:28 AM, Gevisz gev...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, 21 Feb 2014 09:03:47 -0500 Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 2014-02-21 8:54 AM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: If you think all profit is the same, then we are talking on two different wavelengths. I didn't say that. I said that *everyone* operates under the profit motive. And that is simply not true. Yes, it is, but you may be confused about the meaning of 'profit'. Even someone who volunteers in the local soup kitchen feeding the homeless is doing so under the profit motive. The things is, the 'profit' involved (may) only involve(s) a 'warm fuzzy good feeling'. If you read my previous words, I said it wasn't always (though I think it is usually) some kind of 'financial' profit.
[gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Fri, 21 Feb 2014 09:02:31 -0500 Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: As long as OpenRC is the default init system in Gentoo, it is on those who want something *other* than OpenRC (ie, systemd) to do the work of implementing it. It's the job of whoever wants any init system to work to make it work, isn't it? There's no magic that makes the default work without it being someone's job to make it work. No matter what the default is, for any init system to work, there has to be a group of people committed to making it work. There are such groups for OpenRC and systemd within Gentoo. And since Gentoo is about choice, each group bears the burden of doing whatever is reasonable to make sure it doesn't interfere with users' ability to run whichever system they want. Reaching a consensus about whatever is reasonable isn't always a pretty process, but they have to do it anyway. I'm an OpenRC user, and I intend to remain one, but I wouldn't mind if Gentoo had no default init system and the user would have to choose one at install time via a profile choice, eselect, or just a bunch of USE flags, as long as the choices are well documented.
Re: OT: 'profit motive' - WAS Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Tanstaafl: On 2014-02-21 10:28 AM, Gevisz gev...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, 21 Feb 2014 09:03:47 -0500 Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 2014-02-21 8:54 AM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: If you think all profit is the same, then we are talking on two different wavelengths. I didn't say that. I said that *everyone* operates under the profit motive. And that is simply not true. Yes, it is, but you may be confused about the meaning of 'profit'. Even someone who volunteers in the local soup kitchen feeding the homeless is doing so under the profit motive. The things is, the 'profit' involved (may) only involve(s) a 'warm fuzzy good feeling'. If you read my previous words, I said it wasn't always (though I think it is usually) some kind of 'financial' profit. You didn't say it, but it feels like you are talking about personal profit. If not, then your definition of profit is so broad, that it is almost meaningless. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTB32KAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzvssIALcVgrXn/XGTx5ZmXJjuUpIq eN6m6pBQ8b8oO5ujZpx9/l2rMt5zNzwaLpHhF5UEZiZXEEqt9+NSOP62vEuGHn2y Xk5JUDNngIuQaz4geKJXs9YcyA2ZV1MFhZYaxDBOq4DZ4+j75e0FiHuh3jGHfr1+ qUkZWxyWAxoIGb3CUWTedgpr6HqzMJWycL8BDutItfp7dpCobGoY2DSRKX3iSH73 1jtfOx+Ec2QScAmy+fi7sVN9yp5sSSlM4YVmzS5nSw2zemsYVmfqhrTNdPAcy2QE k1xlalMzoIY2EGi68ThjRniXrAQoH2R7kfQsavFSVfratbjjuvdDHxa4sNnbjAE= =V8cT -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: OT: 'profit motive' - WAS Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 2014-02-21 11:23 AM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote: Even someone who volunteers in the local soup kitchen feeding the homeless is doing so under the profit motive. The things is, the 'profit' involved (may) only involve(s) a 'warm fuzzy good feeling'. If you read my previous words, I said it wasn't always (though I think it is usually) some kind of 'financial' profit. You didn't say it, but it feels like you are talking about personal profit. If not, then your definition of profit is so broad, that it is almost meaningless. Not at all. The fact is, there are many different ways someone can 'profit'. Another fact is, there has been a concerted effort by some people to poison the meaning, twisting the meaning of financial profit into being something bad, as opposed to what it really is - a very *good* thing (it is a good thing, without it you would DIE). http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/profit?sourceid=mozilla Take your pick... they are all valid with respect to my comments, although the one that subtley attempts to create a negative meaning 'to take advantage: to profit from the WEAKNESS of others' bugs me no end... People can engage in good (ethical, honest, etc) or bad (unethical, dishonest, etc) behavior in their pursuit of profit, but it is the *behavior* (ethical/honest or unethical/dishonest) that is good or bad, not the result (profit).
Re: OT: 'profit motive' - WAS Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Tanstaafl: On 2014-02-21 11:23 AM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote: Even someone who volunteers in the local soup kitchen feeding the homeless is doing so under the profit motive. The things is, the 'profit' involved (may) only involve(s) a 'warm fuzzy good feeling'. If you read my previous words, I said it wasn't always (though I think it is usually) some kind of 'financial' profit. You didn't say it, but it feels like you are talking about personal profit. If not, then your definition of profit is so broad, that it is almost meaningless. Not at all. The fact is, there are many different ways someone can 'profit'. Another fact is, there has been a concerted effort by some people to poison the meaning, twisting the meaning of financial profit into being something bad, as opposed to what it really is - a very *good* thing (it is a good thing, without it you would DIE). http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/profit?sourceid=mozilla Take your pick... they are all valid with respect to my comments, although the one that subtley attempts to create a negative meaning 'to take advantage: to profit from the WEAKNESS of others' bugs me no end... People can engage in good (ethical, honest, etc) or bad (unethical, dishonest, etc) behavior in their pursuit of profit, but it is the *behavior* (ethical/honest or unethical/dishonest) that is good or bad, not the result (profit). Then you ignore self-destructive behaviour which is a common thing in this world. It can even be intentional, causing no emotional, financial, social or intellectual profit. Maybe you have never met such a person or have never been in such an environment. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTB4oUAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzKwkH/jZMgmx20pvKBJBSHBzVgzYn GCEo4y6OVLKR4MkOMFPbgDh0OiPyLAGwj9A2QJmstTO2UN9LVwdkZLZIT1V4/kK9 3UGoxz5Q/vgLawnJxKesBmq0Qq1acwaEXojT/tngBpLStYvOcNU3Mq4kDlzAcOJ3 tDVoUpxV7fvsAjJZ7hd4LXVWN3vYC/8AYnAfO6K9Cb+VlGIkGDZ6bYDs0k8Wflxn jdEYdsh0k1Bbr5aDZGXRO9pZl7scLRr8SJha0DJwIhc5ZuazyXrX9R8SNw+QSjN8 NiGUIRWMjvwKuziFqRWCGyOJVpbyoaJkg1fxcOHlWvOyHHcOM9TSHHhhGL7Bg3E= =U4Qh -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: OT: 'profit motive' - WAS Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 2014-02-21 12:17 PM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote: Then you ignore self-destructive behaviour which is a common thing in this world. It can even be intentional, causing no emotional, financial, social or intellectual profit. Maybe you have never met such a person or have never been in such an environment. You are confusing 'intent' with 'result'. Even self-destructive behavior is in the vast majority of cases engaged in with the *intention* of profit. Best example I can think of would be a drug addict/alcoholic. When they use/drink, they 'profit' in that the feel better (albeit temporarily), regardless of the ultimate result.
Re: OT: 'profit motive' - WAS Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Tanstaafl: On 2014-02-21 12:17 PM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote: Then you ignore self-destructive behaviour which is a common thing in this world. It can even be intentional, causing no emotional, financial, social or intellectual profit. Maybe you have never met such a person or have never been in such an environment. You are confusing 'intent' with 'result'. No. You are confusing yourself with the rest of the world. Even self-destructive behavior is in the vast majority of cases engaged in with the *intention* of profit. Best example I can think of would be a drug addict/alcoholic. When they use/drink, they 'profit' in that the feel better (albeit temporarily), regardless of the ultimate result. I wasn't really talking about drug addicts. If you are interested in real self-destructive behaviour, talk to someone who has worked in an asylum which is only one interesting environment that can make you think very different about people. There are even people who are not driven by anything, not even self-destruction. Pure apathy. Another interesting thing... talk to a trial lawyer who has been in that business for 10+ years. I really doubt that many of those will support your profit intention concept. Most of the time it's about short-cut reactions that are merely following instincts or emotional impulses. Strong emotions can make someone lose control and do all sorts of weird things without any hope or intention of improving/gaining anything for living it out. It's chemistry, it changes your consciousness. Profit is a bit more complex and requires a minimum amount of reflection, even if it is subconscious, short sighted and follows false assumptions. So these are just 3 points why your generalization does not work, like most of those all people... phrases. Unless you hack on the definition until it suits your interpretation, like redefining profit intention to intention. This reminds me of the user in computer science papers. Well, which one. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTB6qKAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzD5MH/3qVBSactWRWng+x1bT29eP/ Vsd3pSdP5GJ5JkH8Vj2LAhRJy9feRselI/TnZuXOOT+gTzAT+ip1fgqmIHTkaLEx Z1a4L5WXEQxTq9aSoaBFzxstont0zb6LWHfW+c8H+V6UTXPUv6ZdGqP+PlLMLpYO az0KiB09PMa/a3LOzPjhACQ6s1aRo5d4mUqOG91rxh3bOljt6WlMJ61ZEATQGwZt iZJff4sO0qG9p6YeoZED0ep6QvH4UGkfl3yboiVf08uf9mbGSTnOffe5GSJqeBKo 9uGK/tJJ4vkYqcEG60pZaqBuIguobzh84rwWg8DGs++Nv9dWbXi7Focpdse/OaU= =8l+x -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: OT: 'profit motive' - WAS Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 2014-02-21 2:35 PM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote: Tanstaafl: On 2014-02-21 12:17 PM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote: Then you ignore self-destructive behaviour which is a common thing in this world. It can even be intentional, causing no emotional, financial, social or intellectual profit. Maybe you have never met such a person or have never been in such an environment. You are confusing 'intent' with 'result'. No. You are confusing yourself with the rest of the world. Not really, but whatever... Even self-destructive behavior is in the vast majority of cases engaged in with the *intention* of profit. Best example I can think of would be a drug addict/alcoholic. When they use/drink, they 'profit' in that the feel better (albeit temporarily), regardless of the ultimate result. I wasn't really talking about drug addicts. You said 'self-destructive', so I just used the best 'self-destructive' reference I could think of... If you are interested in real self-destructive behaviour, talk to someone who has worked in an asylum which is only one interesting environment that can make you think very different about people. Ok, well, I wasn't talking about the truly *insane*, and it is disingenuous to use them as any kind of example in comparison to 'the rest of us'... There are even people who are not driven by anything, not even self-destruction. Pure apathy. I guarantee they are driven by more than that... often something as simple as 'comfort' (they would only get up in arms if you take away their TV and potato chips)... Another interesting thing... talk to a trial lawyer who has been in that business for 10+ years. I really doubt that many of those will support your profit intention concept. Most of the time it's about short-cut reactions that are merely following instincts or emotional impulses. Strong emotions can make someone lose control and do all sorts of weird things without any hope or intention of improving/gaining anything for living it out. Again, you ignore the different meanings of 'profit' and 'intent'. Following instincts or emotional impulses is *still* operating on the same principle. The profit (benefit) they get may be as simple as 'less pain', but it is still a benefit (profit). It's chemistry, it changes your consciousness. Profit is a bit more complex and requires a minimum amount of reflection, even if it is subconscious, short sighted and follows false assumptions. Not at all. A bull 'profits' by moving when the cattle prod is jammed up his ass. So these are just 3 points why your generalization does not work, Actually, they all serve to *support* my generalizations... if you are in fact honest enough to admit it.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: (When I say I'm done, I mean it; I'm making an exception to explain a mistake you made). Firstly, you don't control whether or not I send an e-mail. No, I don't; I never said that. This is a public non-moderated mailing list; anyone can write whatever it wants. What I said is *I* am done with *you*. You are only spreading FUD without giving any hard evidence nor any technical argument. Therefore *I* am not going to waste anymore of *my* time answering your mails in this thread, until you either provide hard evidence (not hearsay), and/or technical arguments. You are of course free to write whatever you want to the list. I'm just not going to engage with you anymore, until you provide those two basic things. And since you haven't in this new mail... good day, sir. [ sniped the part without any hard evidence nor technical arguments. ] Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 21.02.2014 08:42, Andrew Savchenko wrote: So all talks about systemd being modular are nothing more than nonsense. Guess what will happen on segfault in libsystemd.so? Segfaults in pid 1 are so nice to bear... And now with 209 there is a new systemd-networkd deamon that is started by default even if not configured or used. http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTYxMTI Why has a init system a deamon to configure networks? What comes next? Systemd-Windowsd, a systemd replacement for all other desktop environments? Systemd-Browserd? Systemd-Officed? Greetings Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 1:42 AM, Andrew Savchenko birc...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, 20 Feb 2014 18:08:43 -0600 Daniel Campbell wrote: It's marginally clever, but so clearly obvious at the same time. It's sad (to me) that the community didn't see it coming. Those who did have been written off as conspiracy theorists or FUDders. Time will reveal all. Indeed time reveals everything and part of this foiled plot revealed itself two days ago. It was said earlier in the list by systemd supporters, that this project is modular, fine split to binaries and thus critical issues in the pid 1 are not that likely. And just look at systemd-209 release notes: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-February/017146.html [quote] We merged libsystemd-journal.so, libsystemd-id128.so, libsystemd-login and libsystemd-daemon into a a single libsystemd.so to reduce code duplication and avoid cyclic dependencies (see below). [/quote] So all talks about systemd being modular are nothing more than nonsense. Guess what will happen on segfault in libsystemd.so? Segfaults in pid 1 are so nice to bear... You have no idea what are you talking about, do you? The systemd binary (you know, PID 1) *DOESN'T LINK AGAINST libsystemd.so!* It's for consumers of systemd's APIs. And Canek please talk no more about how talented systemd programmers are or even about how professional they are, because they're no longer. They failed a trivial textbook example: what should one do when libraries A and B have some common code and cyclic deps? Push common code to library C. That's the Unix way and secure way. Creating single bloated library will help in neither fencing nor debugging, nor code audit. This actually I'm even willing to discuss. They give the rationale in the notes you linked: he reason for this is cyclic dependencies, as these libraries tend to use each other's symbols. It's true, they could have splitted even more the libraries, but they instead coalesced them. If the libraries used each other symbols, then they basically are functioning as a single module, and then it can be argued that coalescing them is a good move. I'm not saying I agree; I think I also would have preferred for them to split the cycles into another library. But I give the benefit of the doubt to the maintainers, and certainly would still think they are talented enough. (And again, it's a normal library, for third-party consumers, not PID 1). It looks like to me that ultimate goal of systemd is to consume as much system and user tools and interfaces as possible. Yeah, that's the idea. They have been pretty clear and honest about it. They want systemd to be the standard basic plumbing of Linux. Perhaps, in the ideal systemd world there will be nothing but linux-systemd kernel and systemd-stuff userspace. I would call it systemd-aware userspace, but yeah, again, that's the idea. Shell communication will extinct, all major application and daemons will be converted to systemd modules. Why would you disallow shell communication? It's pretty useful. But it will be complemented with dbus IPC and systemd controlled processes. It works pretty much like this with GNOME right now. If you don't want this, just keep using OpenRC. Nobody is forcing systemd on you. Of course this goal will be never achieved as-is, but one may consider it as an asymptote of their actions. They want systemd to be the basic plumbing of Linux, yes. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: OT: 'profit motive' - WAS Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Fri, 21 Feb 2014 10:56:31 -0500 Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 2014-02-21 10:28 AM, Gevisz gev...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, 21 Feb 2014 09:03:47 -0500 Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 2014-02-21 8:54 AM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: If you think all profit is the same, then we are talking on two different wavelengths. I didn't say that. I said that *everyone* operates under the profit motive. And that is simply not true. Yes, it is, but you may be confused about the meaning of 'profit'. Even someone who volunteers in the local soup kitchen feeding the homeless is doing so under the profit motive. The things is, the 'profit' involved (may) only involve(s) a 'warm fuzzy good feeling'. If you read my previous words Yes, I did. But now, I stop to do so just as have done with Canek before.
Re: OT: 'profit motive' - WAS Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Fri, 21 Feb 2014 19:35:39 + hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Tanstaafl: On 2014-02-21 12:17 PM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote: Then you ignore self-destructive behaviour which is a common thing in this world. It can even be intentional, causing no emotional, financial, social or intellectual profit. Maybe you have never met such a person or have never been in such an environment. You are confusing 'intent' with 'result'. No. You are confusing yourself with the rest of the world. :-) Even self-destructive behavior is in the vast majority of cases engaged in with the *intention* of profit. Best example I can think of would be a drug addict/alcoholic. When they use/drink, they 'profit' in that the feel better (albeit temporarily), regardless of the ultimate result. I wasn't really talking about drug addicts. If you are interested in real self-destructive behaviour, talk to someone who has worked in an asylum which is only one interesting environment that can make you think very different about people. There are even people who are not driven by anything, not even self-destruction. Pure apathy. Another interesting thing... talk to a trial lawyer who has been in that business for 10+ years. I really doubt that many of those will support your profit intention concept. Most of the time it's about short-cut reactions that are merely following instincts or emotional impulses. Strong emotions can make someone lose control and do all sorts of weird things without any hope or intention of improving/gaining anything for living it out. It's chemistry, it changes your consciousness. Profit is a bit more complex and requires a minimum amount of reflection, even if it is subconscious, short sighted and follows false assumptions. So these are just 3 points why your generalization does not work, like most of those all people... phrases. Unless you hack on the definition until it suits your interpretation, like redefining profit intention to intention. Thank you for the wonderful answer! This reminds me of the user in computer science papers. Well, which one. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTB6qKAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzD5MH/3qVBSactWRWng+x1bT29eP/ Vsd3pSdP5GJ5JkH8Vj2LAhRJy9feRselI/TnZuXOOT+gTzAT+ip1fgqmIHTkaLEx Z1a4L5WXEQxTq9aSoaBFzxstont0zb6LWHfW+c8H+V6UTXPUv6ZdGqP+PlLMLpYO az0KiB09PMa/a3LOzPjhACQ6s1aRo5d4mUqOG91rxh3bOljt6WlMJ61ZEATQGwZt iZJff4sO0qG9p6YeoZED0ep6QvH4UGkfl3yboiVf08uf9mbGSTnOffe5GSJqeBKo 9uGK/tJJ4vkYqcEG60pZaqBuIguobzh84rwWg8DGs++Nv9dWbXi7Focpdse/OaU= =8l+x -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Sebastian Beßler sebast...@darkmetatron.de wrote: On 21.02.2014 08:42, Andrew Savchenko wrote: So all talks about systemd being modular are nothing more than nonsense. Guess what will happen on segfault in libsystemd.so? Segfaults in pid 1 are so nice to bear... And now with 209 there is a new systemd-networkd deamon that is started by default even if not configured or used. http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTYxMTI $ ./configure --help | grep networkd --disable-networkd disable networkd It can be disabled. Why has a init system a deamon to configure networks? So you don't need the same script (or service unit file) that configures an static IP or bridge, in millions of servers that do not want to use NetworkManager or anything similar. Again, is optional, you can disable it. What comes next? Systemd-Windowsd, a systemd replacement for all other desktop environments? Systemd-Browserd? Systemd-Officed? Yeah, because configuring an static IP is similar to LibreOffice. Get real. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: OT: 'profit motive' - WAS Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Even self-destructive behavior is in the vast majority of cases engaged in with the *intention* of profit. Best example I can think of would be a drug addict/alcoholic. When they use/drink, they 'profit' in that the feel better (albeit temporarily), regardless of the ultimate result. I wasn't really talking about drug addicts. You said 'self-destructive', so I just used the best 'self-destructive' reference I could think of... It was not the best. If you are interested in real self-destructive behaviour, talk to someone who has worked in an asylum which is only one interesting environment that can make you think very different about people. Ok, well, I wasn't talking about the truly *insane*, and it is disingenuous to use them as any kind of example in comparison to 'the rest of us'... That is just one example and those are not few people. Ruling them out in your generalization is invalid and just proves that you are trolling. The rest of us is as well defined as your profit intention stuff. Meh. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTB/ZWAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzO8UIAJHAVyQCrpMp/bW0yKbAnHSK yvW+15teMgbQZQdru34OYjXHpiLFgjnKF+OwGgOE8+vA908Kawc5Fme2aazYGtC1 gnqFlnnFkMiE37hNvGmef7Jpzl/q1UuZPJHDeh6m0kAJ0QjoxbANxNayQThd1QNX UrlJEpzOr6LwDrjkTnnwcwzNLymr9EB8NAehqd4B5/jsf0ZFoUo7Zn9DOhlv8olp PqdnjkVuIgrtVxhd6OBeQ3OVPsE7qyI5ZTfJUDYYef38WJ6PDj2Nc7jEblJKPsxS NWnZKfS/1w7oIUqnzwS36mKf+PhWrGqefJcIfE3E68DeW+2kxpZlvSCnFMM/sX4= =eRGW -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
The 20/02/14, Yuri K. Shatroff wrote: (see [2]) will print the status of the Apache web server, and also the last lines from the logs. You can control how many lines. You can check also with the journal, as I showed up. I believe it would be a 5-minutes job to add the capability of printing last N log entries for a service to `rc-service status`. Using cat, grep If I understand you correctly, what you're proposing is an analyzing tool which works after-the-facts. I mean extracting the per-daemon logs from a global log archive whereas systemd works the opposite way, AFAIU. You solution requires per-daemon extraction rules and have to be maintained over time. So, postponed to errors. Definetly not a 5-minutes job. -- Nicolas Sebrecht
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
20.02.2014 15:33, Nicolas Sebrecht пишет:
The 20/02/14, Yuri K. Shatroff wrote:
(see [2]) will print the status of the Apache web server, and also the
last lines from the logs. You can control how many lines. You can
check also with the journal, as I showed up.
I believe it would be a 5-minutes job to add the capability of printing
last N log entries for a service to `rc-service status`. Using cat, grep
If I understand you correctly, what you're proposing is an analyzing
tool which works after-the-facts.
I wasn't proposing anything. I was just supposing.
I mean extracting the per-daemon logs
from a global log archive whereas systemd works the opposite way, AFAIU.
What is a 'global log archive'? Do you mean a single file where all logs
go? AFAIK you can set up syslog to log all messages into one file as
well as per-service files. So the deal is just to extract configuration
from syslog. Of course, if the services are using it, not keeping their
own logs as is usually the case of apache. As a multiuser (multi-vhost)
webserver admin I have to set up apache to log into users' home
directories, so I even don't know how many user logs there really are.
And I don't need to, because I've got my own global log. But a user is
definitely more familiar with a text file he/she can download via FTP,
than with a journalctl wrapper which he has to know how to use (and also
be granted SSH access to use), at the least which parameters to specify,
if at all usable in such setups.
You solution requires per-daemon extraction rules and have to be
maintained over time. So, postponed to errors.
I don't need such 'solutions' to non-existent problems. But if there
were a *real* necessity to pretty-print a log's tail in service status,
I think it would have been a matter of a proper setup (i.e. the service
using syslog, hence a defined log format) and not a heck more complicated.
Definetly not a 5-minutes job.
5 minutes is even too much to type sort of
tail -${LINES} ${SERVICE}.log
if you know where to look up LINES and SERVICE.
--
Regards,
Yuri K. Shatroff
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 20/02/2014 13:53, Yuri K. Shatroff wrote:
I don't need such 'solutions' to non-existent problems. But if there
were a *real* necessity to pretty-print a log's tail in service status,
I think it would have been a matter of a proper setup (i.e. the service
using syslog, hence a defined log format) and not a heck more complicated.
Definetly not a 5-minutes job.
5 minutes is even too much to type sort of
tail -${LINES} ${SERVICE}.log
if you know where to look up LINES and SERVICE.
You've never actually tried this, right?
Your idea instantly fails as the rc-service author has no idea of what
you defined ${SERVICE} to be and no way to determine what it is now.
How are you going to deal with the situation with a big busy daemon that
immediately starts serving requests when started (i.e. with very little
delay)?
By the time grep, sed, awk and friends have gotten around to making
their way through a log file of varying size, the entries that apply to
restart can easy be many hundreds of log lines prior.
I have done this, and it does not work. I got a result and it's
relaible, but you don't want to know what it took. It's also highly
customized and useless to anything other than my highly customized setup.
--
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 02/15/2014 08:09 PM, walt wrote: On 02/15/2014 12:30 PM, Daniel Campbell wrote: The social tactics at work from the systemd team (and verily, other Red Hat projects like GNOME) are reminiscent of Microsoft through the use of the Embrace, Extend, Extinguish methodology. I certainly share your hostility towards M$ for suppressing competition. Red Hat, like M$, is a for-profit corporation, so I share your suspicion that they want to suppress their competitors (though I don't know who their competitors are). But comparing a completely closed-source shop like M$ to any open source company leaves me feeling uneasy. I can't find the exact argument to explain my unease, but I'm hoping someone else will jump in with a more rational argument. I think I understand where you're coming from. How can they compare when Red Hat releases their source under a liberating license while MS locks it down behind closed doors? That's missing the point, though. In the FOSS world, that's the bait, so to speak. The wolf in sheep's clothing. Red Hat can release (or hack on) a bunch of attractive software or features, get people interested (so interested that, say, the majority of distros depend on it *wink wink*), and then use that influence to indirectly control where FOSS moves. By striking the weakest part of the stack (sysv probably *did* need a good replacement, but not one as ambitious as systemd) and digging down into the kernel level (kdbus), Red Hat devs will now have a very influential role in the FOSS world. This will in turn generate interest (and thus profit) in Red Hat. It's marginally clever, but so clearly obvious at the same time. It's sad (to me) that the community didn't see it coming. Those who did have been written off as conspiracy theorists or FUDders. Time will reveal all. ~Daniel
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: On 02/15/2014 08:09 PM, walt wrote: On 02/15/2014 12:30 PM, Daniel Campbell wrote: The social tactics at work from the systemd team (and verily, other Red Hat projects like GNOME) are reminiscent of Microsoft through the use of the Embrace, Extend, Extinguish methodology. I certainly share your hostility towards M$ for suppressing competition. Red Hat, like M$, is a for-profit corporation, so I share your suspicion that they want to suppress their competitors (though I don't know who their competitors are). But comparing a completely closed-source shop like M$ to any open source company leaves me feeling uneasy. I can't find the exact argument to explain my unease, but I'm hoping someone else will jump in with a more rational argument. I think I understand where you're coming from. How can they compare when Red Hat releases their source under a liberating license while MS locks it down behind closed doors? That's missing the point, though. No, it's not. In the FOSS world, that's the bait, so to speak. The wolf in sheep's clothing. Red Hat can release (or hack on) a bunch of attractive software or features, get people interested (so interested that, say, the majority of distros depend on it *wink wink*), and then use that influence to indirectly control where FOSS moves. By striking the weakest part of the stack (sysv probably *did* need a good replacement, but not one as ambitious as systemd) and digging down into the kernel level (kdbus), Red Hat devs will now have a very influential role in the FOSS world. This will in turn generate interest (and thus profit) in Red Hat. First of all, you do realize that Greg Kroah-Hartman, the primary author of kdbus, works for the Linux Foundation, right? Not RedHat. Second, good for RedHat if they can turn a profit. Meanwhile the code from the whole stack is free, and anyone willing and able can fork it and use, enhance, or replace any part of it. And yes, I said replace. So, again, the comparison makes no sense at all. It's marginally clever, but so clearly obvious at the same time. It's sad (to me) that the community didn't see it coming. So you are saying we are idiots? Or just naive? Or both? And *all* of us who use systemd and think is a great idea? Damn, if only we had knew. Too bad you didn't come before to open our eyes to this undeniable truth. Now it's too late, the sky is falling and the world will end on fire and brim. Those who did have been written off as conspiracy theorists or FUDders. Time will reveal all. Indeed it will. Wanna bet a beer? Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 02/20/2014 07:42 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: On 02/15/2014 08:09 PM, walt wrote: On 02/15/2014 12:30 PM, Daniel Campbell wrote: The social tactics at work from the systemd team (and verily, other Red Hat projects like GNOME) are reminiscent of Microsoft through the use of the Embrace, Extend, Extinguish methodology. I certainly share your hostility towards M$ for suppressing competition. Red Hat, like M$, is a for-profit corporation, so I share your suspicion that they want to suppress their competitors (though I don't know who their competitors are). But comparing a completely closed-source shop like M$ to any open source company leaves me feeling uneasy. I can't find the exact argument to explain my unease, but I'm hoping someone else will jump in with a more rational argument. I think I understand where you're coming from. How can they compare when Red Hat releases their source under a liberating license while MS locks it down behind closed doors? That's missing the point, though. No, it's not. In the FOSS world, that's the bait, so to speak. The wolf in sheep's clothing. Red Hat can release (or hack on) a bunch of attractive software or features, get people interested (so interested that, say, the majority of distros depend on it *wink wink*), and then use that influence to indirectly control where FOSS moves. By striking the weakest part of the stack (sysv probably *did* need a good replacement, but not one as ambitious as systemd) and digging down into the kernel level (kdbus), Red Hat devs will now have a very influential role in the FOSS world. This will in turn generate interest (and thus profit) in Red Hat. First of all, you do realize that Greg Kroah-Hartman, the primary author of kdbus, works for the Linux Foundation, right? Not RedHat. Second, good for RedHat if they can turn a profit. Meanwhile the code from the whole stack is free, and anyone willing and able can fork it and use, enhance, or replace any part of it. And yes, I said replace. So, again, the comparison makes no sense at all. It's marginally clever, but so clearly obvious at the same time. It's sad (to me) that the community didn't see it coming. So you are saying we are idiots? Or just naive? Or both? And *all* of us who use systemd and think is a great idea? Damn, if only we had knew. Too bad you didn't come before to open our eyes to this undeniable truth. Now it's too late, the sky is falling and the world will end on fire and brim. Those who did have been written off as conspiracy theorists or FUDders. Time will reveal all. Indeed it will. Wanna bet a beer? Regards. Indeed, Greg doesn't work for Red Hat. Prior to working for LF, however, he worked for Novell, another for-profit Linux company. Moot point. Businesses tend to do favors for other businesses. What makes you think Red Hat hasn't given LF some money at some point? Further, isn't Lennart friends with Greg? Isn't that how he got udev into systemd, since Greg maintained udev before it was merged into systemd? Tell the full story if you're going to bring it up. I will refrain from stooping to the level of petty insults... but yes, collectively the FOSS community at large has *terrible* social awareness within its own ecosystem and would not see an agenda coming until it was too late and they had to fork or rebuild. It has nothing to do with me; it has everything to do with foresight. And the FOSS world is lacking in that. Those that have it are outnumbered by those who get distracted by shiny objects and if they care about the future of FOSS, it's only in a superficial sense. FOSS is not just code, it's culture too.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 8:39 PM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: On 02/20/2014 07:42 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: On 02/15/2014 08:09 PM, walt wrote: On 02/15/2014 12:30 PM, Daniel Campbell wrote: The social tactics at work from the systemd team (and verily, other Red Hat projects like GNOME) are reminiscent of Microsoft through the use of the Embrace, Extend, Extinguish methodology. I certainly share your hostility towards M$ for suppressing competition. Red Hat, like M$, is a for-profit corporation, so I share your suspicion that they want to suppress their competitors (though I don't know who their competitors are). But comparing a completely closed-source shop like M$ to any open source company leaves me feeling uneasy. I can't find the exact argument to explain my unease, but I'm hoping someone else will jump in with a more rational argument. I think I understand where you're coming from. How can they compare when Red Hat releases their source under a liberating license while MS locks it down behind closed doors? That's missing the point, though. No, it's not. In the FOSS world, that's the bait, so to speak. The wolf in sheep's clothing. Red Hat can release (or hack on) a bunch of attractive software or features, get people interested (so interested that, say, the majority of distros depend on it *wink wink*), and then use that influence to indirectly control where FOSS moves. By striking the weakest part of the stack (sysv probably *did* need a good replacement, but not one as ambitious as systemd) and digging down into the kernel level (kdbus), Red Hat devs will now have a very influential role in the FOSS world. This will in turn generate interest (and thus profit) in Red Hat. First of all, you do realize that Greg Kroah-Hartman, the primary author of kdbus, works for the Linux Foundation, right? Not RedHat. Second, good for RedHat if they can turn a profit. Meanwhile the code from the whole stack is free, and anyone willing and able can fork it and use, enhance, or replace any part of it. And yes, I said replace. So, again, the comparison makes no sense at all. It's marginally clever, but so clearly obvious at the same time. It's sad (to me) that the community didn't see it coming. So you are saying we are idiots? Or just naive? Or both? And *all* of us who use systemd and think is a great idea? Damn, if only we had knew. Too bad you didn't come before to open our eyes to this undeniable truth. Now it's too late, the sky is falling and the world will end on fire and brim. Those who did have been written off as conspiracy theorists or FUDders. Time will reveal all. Indeed it will. Wanna bet a beer? Regards. Indeed, Greg doesn't work for Red Hat. Prior to working for LF, however, he worked for Novell, another for-profit Linux company. Moot point. Businesses tend to do favors for other businesses. What makes you think Red Hat hasn't given LF some money at some point? Further, isn't Lennart friends with Greg? Isn't that how he got udev into systemd, since Greg maintained udev before it was merged into systemd? Tell the full story if you're going to bring it up. So, now it's RedHat, Novell and the Linux Foundation. Anyone else? The NSA? The CIA? The Cobra Commander? The Cobra Commander is always involved. I will refrain from stooping to the level of petty insults... but yes, collectively the FOSS community at large has *terrible* social awareness within its own ecosystem and would not see an agenda coming until it was too late and they had to fork or rebuild. It has nothing to do with me; it has everything to do with foresight. And the FOSS world is lacking in that. Those that have it are outnumbered by those who get distracted by shiny objects and if they care about the future of FOSS, it's only in a superficial sense. Gee, if I though that about our community, then I would not want to be part of it. Good think I don't think like you. FOSS is not just code, it's culture too. Exactly, and it seems you miss the whole point about the FOSS culture too. I will not answer any more of your mails until you present some actual evidence about this big bad group of people under the guidance of shady corporations trying to take advantage of the poor, stupid, social inept FOSS community. I do not care about hearsay. I care about facts, and technological arguments. If you do not have any of those, I'm done with you in this thread. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 02/20/2014 08:53 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 8:39 PM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: On 02/20/2014 07:42 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: On 02/15/2014 08:09 PM, walt wrote: On 02/15/2014 12:30 PM, Daniel Campbell wrote: The social tactics at work from the systemd team (and verily, other Red Hat projects like GNOME) are reminiscent of Microsoft through the use of the Embrace, Extend, Extinguish methodology. I certainly share your hostility towards M$ for suppressing competition. Red Hat, like M$, is a for-profit corporation, so I share your suspicion that they want to suppress their competitors (though I don't know who their competitors are). But comparing a completely closed-source shop like M$ to any open source company leaves me feeling uneasy. I can't find the exact argument to explain my unease, but I'm hoping someone else will jump in with a more rational argument. I think I understand where you're coming from. How can they compare when Red Hat releases their source under a liberating license while MS locks it down behind closed doors? That's missing the point, though. No, it's not. In the FOSS world, that's the bait, so to speak. The wolf in sheep's clothing. Red Hat can release (or hack on) a bunch of attractive software or features, get people interested (so interested that, say, the majority of distros depend on it *wink wink*), and then use that influence to indirectly control where FOSS moves. By striking the weakest part of the stack (sysv probably *did* need a good replacement, but not one as ambitious as systemd) and digging down into the kernel level (kdbus), Red Hat devs will now have a very influential role in the FOSS world. This will in turn generate interest (and thus profit) in Red Hat. First of all, you do realize that Greg Kroah-Hartman, the primary author of kdbus, works for the Linux Foundation, right? Not RedHat. Second, good for RedHat if they can turn a profit. Meanwhile the code from the whole stack is free, and anyone willing and able can fork it and use, enhance, or replace any part of it. And yes, I said replace. So, again, the comparison makes no sense at all. It's marginally clever, but so clearly obvious at the same time. It's sad (to me) that the community didn't see it coming. So you are saying we are idiots? Or just naive? Or both? And *all* of us who use systemd and think is a great idea? Damn, if only we had knew. Too bad you didn't come before to open our eyes to this undeniable truth. Now it's too late, the sky is falling and the world will end on fire and brim. Those who did have been written off as conspiracy theorists or FUDders. Time will reveal all. Indeed it will. Wanna bet a beer? Regards. Indeed, Greg doesn't work for Red Hat. Prior to working for LF, however, he worked for Novell, another for-profit Linux company. Moot point. Businesses tend to do favors for other businesses. What makes you think Red Hat hasn't given LF some money at some point? Further, isn't Lennart friends with Greg? Isn't that how he got udev into systemd, since Greg maintained udev before it was merged into systemd? Tell the full story if you're going to bring it up. So, now it's RedHat, Novell and the Linux Foundation. Anyone else? The NSA? The CIA? The Cobra Commander? The Cobra Commander is always involved. I will refrain from stooping to the level of petty insults... but yes, collectively the FOSS community at large has *terrible* social awareness within its own ecosystem and would not see an agenda coming until it was too late and they had to fork or rebuild. It has nothing to do with me; it has everything to do with foresight. And the FOSS world is lacking in that. Those that have it are outnumbered by those who get distracted by shiny objects and if they care about the future of FOSS, it's only in a superficial sense. Gee, if I though that about our community, then I would not want to be part of it. Good think I don't think like you. FOSS is not just code, it's culture too. Exactly, and it seems you miss the whole point about the FOSS culture too. I will not answer any more of your mails until you present some actual evidence about this big bad group of people under the guidance of shady corporations trying to take advantage of the poor, stupid, social inept FOSS community. I do not care about hearsay. I care about facts, and technological arguments. If you do not have any of those, I'm done with you in this thread. Regards. Firstly, you don't control whether or not I send an e-mail. The high horse is completely unnecessary. This particular thread (from walt) had nothing to do with you directly, so I don't know why you're getting so upset. You're free to hit the Delete button in your e-mail client or add me to your spam filter. I said nothing
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
20.02.2014 19:24, Alan McKinnon пишет:
On 20/02/2014 13:53, Yuri K. Shatroff wrote:
I don't need such 'solutions' to non-existent problems. But if there
were a *real* necessity to pretty-print a log's tail in service status,
I think it would have been a matter of a proper setup (i.e. the service
using syslog, hence a defined log format) and not a heck more complicated.
Definetly not a 5-minutes job.
5 minutes is even too much to type sort of
tail -${LINES} ${SERVICE}.log
if you know where to look up LINES and SERVICE.
You've never actually tried this, right?
You probably misunderstood. I don't *intend* to try this myself with
existing tools, I'm speaking of the init scripts modification. I say
that this modification of e.g. OpenRC, if required, would be done quite
easily with some assumptions.
Your idea instantly fails as the rc-service author has no idea of what
you defined ${SERVICE} to be and no way to determine what it is now.
Yes, the rc-service author does not have any idea because he is not
requested to.
${SERVICE} obviously comes from `rc-service status ${SERVICE}` .
The result (e.g. tail -n {$LINES} ${SERVICE}.log) is achieved by:
1. putting LINES= in /etc/conf.d/${SERVICE}
2. setting up ${SERVICE}.log with syslog. (or putting LOGFILE=... and
doing `tail -n ${LINES} ${LOGFILE}, or even LAST_LOG_CMD=`mysql -qe
'SELECT ... FROM log.log ORDER BY date DESC LIMIT ${LINES}'`, or *whatever*)
3. adding this `tail -n ...` or whatever call to the init script .
4. voila.
If you feel I'm again entirely wrong please point out why.
How are you going to deal with the situation with a big busy daemon that
immediately starts serving requests when started (i.e. with very little
delay)?
Either you or I seem to have misunderstood again.
The problem in question IMO was to add the output of last N log entries
to `*service status` analogous to systemctl status.
When you do tail -n $FILE, don't you *always* get the last N lines of
the file at the moment of issuing the cmd, regardless whether the file
is being added a million lines per second. I don't think that journalctl
can essentially work differently.
By the time grep, sed, awk and friends have gotten around to making
their way through a log file of varying size, the entries that apply to
restart can easy be many hundreds of log lines prior.
Why do you refer to restart?
Canek wrote:
systemctl status apache2.service
(see [2]) will print the status of the Apache web server, and also
the last lines from the logs. You can control how many lines
I don't notice anything about restart here. Just print out the last N lines.
If the question were about [re]start logs, and if in general you are
getting millions of entries written to the logs, you could use DBMS (not
necessarily relational). Maybe this *does* require some mess to setup
(we did it back in times of SunOS), but it could be resolved with
OpenRC/any SysV/BSD init (at the init-scripts level) if really necessary.
Am I wrong?
I have done this, and it does not work. I got a result and it's
relaible, but you don't want to know what it took. It's also highly
customized and useless to anything other than my highly customized setup.
Well, if you have to set up one system from scratch then probably it's
easier to use one generalized tool. But if you have an already
long-working setup which suits your needs, I believe it's relatively
easy to deploy it on other systems.
I don't like truisms but there is no generic setup suitable for
everything. Neither is systemd-journald.
--
Regards,
Yuri K. Shatroff
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Thu, 20 Feb 2014 18:08:43 -0600 Daniel Campbell wrote: It's marginally clever, but so clearly obvious at the same time. It's sad (to me) that the community didn't see it coming. Those who did have been written off as conspiracy theorists or FUDders. Time will reveal all. Indeed time reveals everything and part of this foiled plot revealed itself two days ago. It was said earlier in the list by systemd supporters, that this project is modular, fine split to binaries and thus critical issues in the pid 1 are not that likely. And just look at systemd-209 release notes: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-February/017146.html [quote] We merged libsystemd-journal.so, libsystemd-id128.so, libsystemd-login and libsystemd-daemon into a a single libsystemd.so to reduce code duplication and avoid cyclic dependencies (see below). [/quote] So all talks about systemd being modular are nothing more than nonsense. Guess what will happen on segfault in libsystemd.so? Segfaults in pid 1 are so nice to bear... And Canek please talk no more about how talented systemd programmers are or even about how professional they are, because they're no longer. They failed a trivial textbook example: what should one do when libraries A and B have some common code and cyclic deps? Push common code to library C. That's the Unix way and secure way. Creating single bloated library will help in neither fencing nor debugging, nor code audit. It looks like to me that ultimate goal of systemd is to consume as much system and user tools and interfaces as possible. Perhaps, in the ideal systemd world there will be nothing but linux-systemd kernel and systemd-stuff userspace. Shell communication will extinct, all major application and daemons will be converted to systemd modules. Of course this goal will be never achieved as-is, but one may consider it as an asymptote of their actions. Best regards, Andrew Savchenko pgpef2uhhHI0s.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
The 17/02/14, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: It depends; right now you can't switch back and forth between OpenRC and systemd without reemerging some stuff. Interesting. Didn't know that. What packages need to be recompiled? BTW, respect for your patience in this thread! -- Nicolas Sebrecht
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 2:19 AM, Nicolas Sebrecht nsebre...@piing.fr wrote: The 17/02/14, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: It depends; right now you can't switch back and forth between OpenRC and systemd without reemerging some stuff. Interesting. Didn't know that. What packages need to be recompiled? Some packages need to be emerged with USE=-systemd when going from systemd to OpenRC, and with USE=systemd the other way around. Different code paths are selected in each case. As I said before, the code paths could be chosen at run time, but I don't think any upstream will accept patches supporting this, or think that they are useful BTW, respect for your patience in this thread! Thanks; I've been on the list since 2002, so I think I can say that this thread has been actually pretty civil and technically oriented (except for a couple of trolls). Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Tue, Feb 18 2014, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 2:19 AM, Nicolas Sebrecht nsebre...@piing.fr wrote: The 17/02/14, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: It depends; right now you can't switch back and forth between OpenRC and systemd without reemerging some stuff. Interesting. Didn't know that. What packages need to be recompiled? Some packages need to be emerged with USE=-systemd when going from systemd to OpenRC, and with USE=systemd the other way around. Different code paths are selected in each case. I think the consolekit USE flag also has to be changed. Systemd: USE=+systemd -consolkit OpenRC: USE=-systemd +consolkit At least that is what I did when I switched OpenRC--Systemd (with Canek's help). Now I have no global USE flags, thanks to the systemd subprofile. newlap-wireless gottlieb # eselect profile show Current /etc/portage/make.profile symlink: default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/gnome/systemd newlap-wireless gottlieb # allan
[gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 07:22:17 +0200 Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote: How long has it been since Debian decided to go with systemd? Like, three? So, up until three days ago I would have disagreed since despite original upstream ditching ConsoleKit, it was still being maintained by Debian and Gentoo maintainers (me) and last release, 0.4.6, was in fact a result of that. And Debian hopefully will keep helping with any maintenance needed on it. They haven't decided to stop support of everything but systemd; they've only decided systemd will be the default.
[gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 14:34:34 -0600, Daniel Campbell li...@sporkbox.us wrote: Why didn't they consider runit? It has parallel execution of daemons and is backwards compatible with sysv. It has a few other mini-features as well, iirc. I used for a little while before Arch pushed systemd on their community and it was interesting. I'll just put this link to a forum thread on epoch from late last year, in case any potentially interested party has not seen it yet. It's available in the gentoo package tree, and from the thread it seems to have workable integration. http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-975382-highlight-epoch.html -- eroen signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 02/15/2014 12:30 PM, Daniel Campbell wrote: The social tactics at work from the systemd team (and verily, other Red Hat projects like GNOME) are reminiscent of Microsoft through the use of the Embrace, Extend, Extinguish methodology. I certainly share your hostility towards M$ for suppressing competition. Red Hat, like M$, is a for-profit corporation, so I share your suspicion that they want to suppress their competitors (though I don't know who their competitors are). But comparing a completely closed-source shop like M$ to any open source company leaves me feeling uneasy. I can't find the exact argument to explain my unease, but I'm hoping someone else will jump in with a more rational argument.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 4:09 AM, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote: On 02/15/2014 12:30 PM, Daniel Campbell wrote: The social tactics at work from the systemd team (and verily, other Red Hat projects like GNOME) are reminiscent of Microsoft through the use of the Embrace, Extend, Extinguish methodology. I certainly share your hostility towards M$ for suppressing competition. Red Hat, like M$, is a for-profit corporation, so I share your suspicion that they want to suppress their competitors (though I don't know who their competitors are). But comparing a completely closed-source shop like M$ to any open source company leaves me feeling uneasy. I can't find the exact argument to explain my unease, but I'm hoping someone else will jump in with a more rational argument. Once the vertical will be too high and spaghetti like, there will be no difference between close source and open source vendor, as nobody will be able to maintain the vertical without being payed for it. Even if one believes that he has a great fix/improvement, he won't be able to get it merged unless he is endorsed or work in specific vendor, as the roadmap, support matrix and content will be determined by that open source vendor. It will be impossible to fork it either as forking the entire vertical is out of the question. Regards, Alon
