Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 10:08 AM, Mark David Dumlao madum...@gmail.com wrote: Point is he's trying to paint the picture that systemd folks rattle on and on about its speed, but they don't. The speed argument/anti-argument can be traced back to Lennart's first blog post on systemd (IIRC rethinking pid 1) where he touted its speeding up of the boot process. The reason that's regularly brought up is that there aren't (m)any purely technical counterpoints to systemd so boot speed (and binary logs but the latter can be disabled with setting Storage=none in journald.conf and setting up a socket for syslog to store the logs) are targeted.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Sep 21, 2014 5:10 PM, Tom H tomh0...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 10:08 AM, Mark David Dumlao madum...@gmail.com wrote: Point is he's trying to paint the picture that systemd folks rattle on and on about its speed, but they don't. The speed argument/anti-argument can be traced back to Lennart's first blog post on systemd (IIRC rethinking pid 1) where he touted its speeding up of the boot process. The reason that's regularly brought up is that there aren't (m)any purely technical counterpoints to systemd so boot speed (and binary logs but the latter can be disabled with setting Storage=none in journald.conf and setting up a socket for syslog to store the logs) are targeted. Im well aware of Lennart talking about it but the relevant matter is whether it was ever brought up in the conversation or not. If youre saying its on me to prove a claim you better be fucking sure i made or care about the claim in the first place. And on this list its consistently the anti-fanboys that make the claim, because even Lennart himself doesnt emphasize the speed as much as is imagined - he often mentions it as a mere side effect of a clean bootup. Id link you the posts that say so if i werent on a moving train.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Alec Ten Harmsel a...@alectenharmsel.com wrote: On 09/17/2014 10:40 PM, Mark David Dumlao wrote: Fact is if it's _you_ that seems to give a tweet about systemd speed, so it's on _you_ to measure it, I don't really care what you think. The fact that you think pid1's speed or resource usage might be a big deal is very indicative on how badly informed you are in the first place. I don't care about systemd speed. I really am completely ambivalent about PID1; I've run Upstart, I've run systemd, I've run OpenRC, and they all work fine. All I'm saying is that a common point in the systemd community seems to be its awesome performance (unless I'm reading the wrong documentation and conversations), and burden of proof is on the party making the claim. The thing is, that's a strawman. Volker is outright delusional about systemd people breaking into his threads and forcefeeding him Lennart facts like systemd is faster. It's the exact opposite. Every time a systemd thread comes up, here come the anti-fanboys whining about well why should _i_ use it? because it's _faster_? as if we gave a crap that he did. The burden of proof is on the party making the claim, but almost nobody is making the claim -to him-. The fact that he thinks systemd's speed is important already betrays how biased and narrow his thinking is on the topic. Most people don't even bother with bootup speeds that cut a few seconds off. Heck I tried to tweak my boot process with systemd and I had a hard time getting _even_ with Ubuntu. Generally we care more about the fact that services have actual dependencies, are written declaratively, can be executed exactly as upstream recommends, don't have magic code hacks, are automatically cgrouped and thus have all child processes guaranteed killed on service down, that logs and STDOUT are tracked and searchable in the journal, etc etc etc. Every single one of those matters more than bootup speed, but yeah, we heard somewhere that you can tweak parallel boots to be faster or something. Point is he's trying to paint the picture that systemd folks rattle on and on about its speed, but they don't. And now _we_ have to prove it? Most of the time we're not even the ones making the claim. It's like a McD fanboy asking a BK fan to prove that their burgers are healthier than Big Macs... might be true, might be false, heck either company probably has info confirming it, but it's probably the last thing on the BK fan's mind and he's confused that it's even ever brought up. -- This email is:[ ] actionable [ ] fyi[ ] social Response needed: [ ] yes [ ] up to you [ ] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate[ ] soon [ ] none
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 3:18 AM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2014-09-18, Alec Ten Harmsel a...@alectenharmsel.com wrote: Mark David Dumlao wrote: The code is out there. Freely available. Both systemd and sysvinit. If you wanted to measure both, you could, literally, in the time it took since you first posted in this thread till now you could have measured several times and left mean comments about whichever system you hated the most. Unfortunately, the systemd guys keep screaming that systemd is faster, and burden of proof is on the party that's claiming something. It's not James'/Volker's responsibility to prove that systemd isn't faster. I don't understand all the hoopla about systemd being faster. Faster at what? Booting? The only Linux systems where I care about boot time are embedded systems which are never going to have the resources needed to run systemd. You are mistaken. I've helped a friend debug problems on a couple devices running a custom Arch system with systemd. -- This email is:[ ] actionable [ ] fyi[ ] social Response needed: [ ] yes [ ] up to you [ ] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate[ ] soon [ ] none
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
Am 18.09.2014 um 01:24 schrieb Mark David Dumlao: On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 7:11 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com mailto:wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: Mark David Dumlao madumlao at gmail.com http://gmail.com writes: You're the only one in this thread that's imposing on everyone to produce anything. You're the only one in this thread that SHOULD be producing anything. That's how open source works and that's how it's supposed to work. We're not your unpaid researchers. I'm sorry, Volker pointed out that the pro systemd folks came to gentoo-user, waiving linux's dirty panties around. We ask a few simple questions, now you result to name calling? There is no gentoo-user separate from pro systemd folks. You made that up. pro systemd folks have been part of gentoo user for years and years now, and they've been harassed repeatedly with simple loaded questions based on wrong assumptions for years and years now. and that makes it fine to constantly spread pro-systemd propaganga? So.. according to your logic, it would be fine to subscribe to systemd mailing lists and constantly post why distri X or application Y is the best of all?
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
Am 20.09.2014 um 16:08 schrieb Mark David Dumlao: On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Alec Ten Harmsel a...@alectenharmsel.com mailto:a...@alectenharmsel.com wrote: On 09/17/2014 10:40 PM, Mark David Dumlao wrote: Fact is if it's _you_ that seems to give a tweet about systemd speed, so it's on _you_ to measure it, I don't really care what you think. The fact that you think pid1's speed or resource usage might be a big deal is very indicative on how badly informed you are in the first place. I don't care about systemd speed. I really am completely ambivalent about PID1; I've run Upstart, I've run systemd, I've run OpenRC, and they all work fine. All I'm saying is that a common point in the systemd community seems to be its awesome performance (unless I'm reading the wrong documentation and conversations), and burden of proof is on the party making the claim. The thing is, that's a strawman. Volker is outright delusional about systemd people breaking into his threads and forcefeeding him Lennart facts like systemd is faster. It's the exact opposite. Every time a systemd thread comes up, here come the anti-fanboys whining about well why should _i_ use it? because it's _faster_? as if we gave a crap that he did. I am deluded? Who again posted systemd propaganda again? The burden of proof is on the party making the claim, but almost nobody is making the claim -to him-. No, just on public mailing lists and fora. True, speed is not a factor. Except if you claim it is. The fact that he thinks systemd's speed is important already betrays how biased and narrow his thinking is on the topic. Most people don't even bother with bootup speeds that cut a few seconds off. Heck I tried to tweak my boot process with systemd and I had a hard time getting _even_ with Ubuntu. so the systemd-fanbois that always masturbate about how systemd is so much faster than anything else are actually lying? Interesting. If those systemd-fanbois wouldn't talk about how-fast-their-toy-is, I wouldn't care about it. I only boot to replace kernels. I don't care about boot time, as long as it stays under 5 minutes. Generally we care more about the fact that services have actual dependencies, are written declaratively, can be executed exactly as upstream recommends, don't have magic code hacks, are automatically cgrouped and thus have all child processes guaranteed killed on service down, that logs and STDOUT are tracked and searchable in the journal, etc etc etc. Every single one of those matters more than bootup speed, but yeah, we heard somewhere that you can tweak parallel boots to be faster or something. and if your system breaks and systemd stops working - how do you easily access those logs? Just a question. With other logging solutions it is easy: cat, less tail... etc. Point is he's trying to paint the picture that systemd folks rattle on and on about its speed, but they don't. except when they do.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 12:28 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: I am deluded? Who again posted systemd propaganda again? Point is he's trying to paint the picture that systemd folks rattle on and on about its speed, but they don't. except when they do. The first person who even brought up systemd's speed was making an anti-systemd remark. Several times in this thread the need to even discuss speed was dismissed because very few people cared much for speed in the first place. And the fact of the matter is that's how most systemd threads run in this list. systemd has a new feature or help me get this thing to work or has anyone tested blabla yet all invariably end up with very few pro-systemd people even bringing up speed and many anti-systemd people demanding that they do. Case in point, you and your bullshit here. -- This email is:[ ] actionable [ ] fyi[ ] social Response needed: [ ] yes [ ] up to you [ ] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate[ ] soon [ ] none
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 12:24 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: Am 18.09.2014 um 01:24 schrieb Mark David Dumlao: On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 7:11 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: Mark David Dumlao madumlao at gmail.com writes: You're the only one in this thread that's imposing on everyone to produce anything. You're the only one in this thread that SHOULD be producing anything. That's how open source works and that's how it's supposed to work. We're not your unpaid researchers. I'm sorry, Volker pointed out that the pro systemd folks came to gentoo-user, waiving linux's dirty panties around. We ask a few simple questions, now you result to name calling? There is no gentoo-user separate from pro systemd folks. You made that up. pro systemd folks have been part of gentoo user for years and years now, and they've been harassed repeatedly with simple loaded questions based on wrong assumptions for years and years now. and that makes it fine to constantly spread pro-systemd propaganga? So.. according to your logic, it would be fine to subscribe to systemd mailing lists and constantly post why distri X or application Y is the best of all? systemd is in portage you stupid troll, and it has been for years now. -- This email is:[ ] actionable [ ] fyi[ ] social Response needed: [ ] yes [ ] up to you [ ] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate[ ] soon [ ] none
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 1:18 AM, Mark David Dumlao madum...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 12:24 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: Am 18.09.2014 um 01:24 schrieb Mark David Dumlao: On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 7:11 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: Mark David Dumlao madumlao at gmail.com writes: You're the only one in this thread that's imposing on everyone to produce anything. You're the only one in this thread that SHOULD be producing anything. That's how open source works and that's how it's supposed to work. We're not your unpaid researchers. I'm sorry, Volker pointed out that the pro systemd folks came to gentoo-user, waiving linux's dirty panties around. We ask a few simple questions, now you result to name calling? There is no gentoo-user separate from pro systemd folks. You made that up. pro systemd folks have been part of gentoo user for years and years now, and they've been harassed repeatedly with simple loaded questions based on wrong assumptions for years and years now. and that makes it fine to constantly spread pro-systemd propaganga? So.. according to your logic, it would be fine to subscribe to systemd mailing lists and constantly post why distri X or application Y is the best of all? systemd is in portage you stupid troll, and it has been for years now. and in fact I just searched my inbox for the search terms gentoo-user and systemd and I had to go back an entire 150+ threads to encounter the first propaganda thread that you seem to claim this mailing list is saturated with - the Debian thread all the way back in February. Oh wow. Constant posting of systemd propaganda left and right there, when it's _literally_ less than 1% of the encountered threads mentioning systemd in it. You are delusional if you think systemd concerns are not part of gentoo. You are delusional if you think this list is crowded with systemd propaganda. Don't use this list to push _your_ propaganda of how things should work for other people. -- This email is:[ ] actionable [ ] fyi[ ] social Response needed: [ ] yes [ ] up to you [ ] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate[ ] soon [ ] none
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2014-09-20, Mark David Dumlao madum...@gmail.com wrote: The only Linux systems where I care about boot time are embedded systems which are never going to have the resources needed to run systemd. You are mistaken. No, I am not. Guys, can we quit arguing about how we argue on the list? -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: Am 18.09.2014 um 01:24 schrieb Mark David Dumlao: On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 7:11 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: Mark David Dumlao madumlao at gmail.com writes: You're the only one in this thread that's imposing on everyone to produce anything. You're the only one in this thread that SHOULD be producing anything. That's how open source works and that's how it's supposed to work. We're not your unpaid researchers. I'm sorry, Volker pointed out that the pro systemd folks came to gentoo-user, waiving linux's dirty panties around. We ask a few simple questions, now you result to name calling? There is no gentoo-user separate from pro systemd folks. You made that up. pro systemd folks have been part of gentoo user for years and years now, and they've been harassed repeatedly with simple loaded questions based on wrong assumptions for years and years now. and that makes it fine to constantly spread pro-systemd propaganga? Just to be clear, I did prefixed the subject with [OT], and in the first paragraph I clearly stated that this as highly off-topic, and systemd related. You could have easily ignored the post, but your bigotry against systemd made you post your laughable arguments. It was *you* who got into an explicitly marked off-topic thread. So.. according to your logic, it would be fine to subscribe to systemd mailing lists and constantly post why distri X or application Y is the best of all? If you marked it off-topic and was slightly related to systemd (like what distro X or app Y works better with systemd), I don't think nobody would mind. It probably would be mostly ignored, though. And as Mark has already stated, systemd is part of Gentoo (now for several years). Any post related to systemd is slightly related to Gentoo, or at least to the many users using it (this is gentoo-user, remember?) I understand that, like a five year old that doesn't want to hear about something, you would prefer that nobody *ever* posted anything positive about systemd, or GNOME, or PulseAudio, or... man, your bigotry is *HUGE*, it even sounds tiring. Anyway; it's not going to happen: we will continue to post systemd-related topics in gentoo-user if we consider them interesting to at least part of the Gentoo community (which several members, including developers, already said they did). So I suggest you to do exactly like a five year old, cover your ears and sing LA-LA-LA, because we are here to stay. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 2:58 AM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2014-09-20, Mark David Dumlao madum...@gmail.com wrote: The only Linux systems where I care about boot time are embedded systems which are never going to have the resources needed to run systemd. You are mistaken. No, I am not. I've helped a friend debug problems on a couple devices running a custom Arch system with systemd. How does that contradict the statement I made that the systems where I care about boot times do not have the resources required to run systemd? You made a generic, catch-all statement about embedded systems which isnt necessarily true. There are plenty of routers or NAS devices or ipcams, etc that have the resources to run systemd. Pretty much everything that has the space to fit the kernel and a a few MB has the resources to run it -- This email is:[ ] actionable [ ] fyi[ ] social Response needed: [ ] yes [ ] up to you [ ] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate[ ] soon [ ] none
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Mark David Dumlao madum...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 2:58 AM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2014-09-20, Mark David Dumlao madum...@gmail.com wrote: The only Linux systems where I care about boot time are embedded systems which are never going to have the resources needed to run systemd. You are mistaken. No, I am not. I've helped a friend debug problems on a couple devices running a custom Arch system with systemd. How does that contradict the statement I made that the systems where I care about boot times do not have the resources required to run systemd? You made a generic, catch-all statement about embedded systems which isnt necessarily true. There are plenty of routers or NAS devices or ipcams, etc that have the resources to run systemd. Pretty much everything that has the space to fit the kernel and a a few MB has the resources to run it Sorry I clicked somewhere onscreen and it sent immediately. An audit of 204 on debian shows that it's small to negligible, with a lot of optional components. https://people.debian.org/~stapelberg/docs/systemd-dependencies.html -- This email is:[ ] actionable [ ] fyi[ ] social Response needed: [ ] yes [ ] up to you [ ] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate[ ] soon [ ] none -- This email is:[ ] actionable [ ] fyi[ ] social Response needed: [ ] yes [ ] up to you [ ] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate[ ] soon [ ] none
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Thu, 18 Sep 2014 07:19:21 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: Is systemd starting to encompass too much? I think so, but who cares? If we want an init manager that reads systemd-like files but doesn't do anything else (hostnamectl, logging, udev, etc.), I guess we'll have to make one. or trim it back. Conceptually, it shouldn't be too hard to remove those extra services leaving only an init manager. Reading posts over the years (I don't use systemd) most of that stuff can be disabled by config in systemd anyway A lot of it is disabled by default anyway, you have to turn it on if you want to use it. Otherwise it's just there. -- Neil Bothwick - We are but packets in the internet of Life- signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On 18/09/2014 10:07, Neil Bothwick wrote: On Thu, 18 Sep 2014 07:19:21 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: Is systemd starting to encompass too much? I think so, but who cares? If we want an init manager that reads systemd-like files but doesn't do anything else (hostnamectl, logging, udev, etc.), I guess we'll have to make one. or trim it back. Conceptually, it shouldn't be too hard to remove those extra services leaving only an init manager. Reading posts over the years (I don't use systemd) most of that stuff can be disabled by config in systemd anyway A lot of it is disabled by default anyway, you have to turn it on if you want to use it. Otherwise it's just there. That's even better then. I'm mildly bemused by these systemd threads - so much emotion. Me, I don't have a dog in this fight so I can sit back and look at what's going on. Imagine the ISC-bind lovers going completely apeshit about unbound, thinking named is about to go away forever. That's what this looks like. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 20:54:49 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: The fact is among those actually contributing to projects like openrc, udev, eudev, and systemd everybody tends to get along just fine. There is plenty of interest in finding common ground and collaborating so that anybody switching from one to another can do so easily, and so that these projects don't diverge where it isn't intended. It seems like the heaviest fighting seems to involve folks who don't contribute to any of these. Isn't that how it always is? :( I'm sure Canek realised that a flamefest would result from his post, but it's a rather sad indictment of us that there as been almost no discussion of Linus's comments - I wonder how many of the contributors to this thread even read the link Canek posted. Personally, I like to read Linus's opinions no such matters; the are always insightful, usually entertaining and occasionally correct :) -- Neil Bothwick Run with scissors. Remove mattress tags. Top post. Be a rebel. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: The only Linux systems where I care about boot time are embedded systems which are never going to have the resources needed to run systemd. How about containers? When I launch mariadb I'd prefer that it happen in milliseconds, not tens of seconds. That includes setting up interfaces, populating /dev, getting an ip, launching ssh, syslog, etc, and so on, oh, and mariadb. The other thing I keep hearing from systemd proponents is stuff about how it allows you to parallelize startup. I don't _want_ stuff starting up in parallel -- that just makes it all the more difficult to troubleshoot problems. I want things to start up one at a time, in a determined order. I hope you aren't running openrc then. It doesn't launch in a predetermined order. I will agree that you get far more race conditions than you do with openrc even with parallel startup, since processes start much more quickly. -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On 19/09/14 03:18, Grant Edwards wrote: On 2014-09-18, Alec Ten Harmsel a...@alectenharmsel.com wrote: Mark David Dumlao wrote: The code is out there. Freely available. Both systemd and sysvinit. If you wanted to measure both, you could, literally, in the time it took since you first posted in this thread till now you could have measured several times and left mean comments about whichever system you hated the most. Unfortunately, the systemd guys keep screaming that systemd is faster, and burden of proof is on the party that's claiming something. It's not James'/Volker's responsibility to prove that systemd isn't faster. I don't understand all the hoopla about systemd being faster. Faster at what? Booting? The only Linux systems where I care about boot time are embedded systems which are never going to have the resources needed to run systemd is targeted at cloud systems and fast booting which is where I guess redhats focus is these days since they seem to have lost the desktop space. The fact that systemd isn't potentially as reliable etc. is irrelevant when you are looking at a more disposable cloud model where fast start and short life predominate. The problem is that systemd is being forced into areas where people don't want it (inc. me). BillK
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:28 PM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: Linus should make a clear, leadership statement that there will always be a path for folks to use another mechanism besides systemd in the linux kernel; This does not have to be a systemd vs cgroups discussion, but it being presented this way. A clear statement of multiplicity will put this issue to rest once and for all. By not stating clearly was is obvious, many technically astute folks are looking for options. Surely a fork is emminent and it will most likely be the best thing to happen to linux, as the entire kernel development process has become tainted by those with billions of dollars. Uh, the only thing the Linux kernel does is spawn a single process as PID 1 and offer a VERY STABLE system call interface for that and future processes to make requests. Nobody is going to break sysvinit if that happens to be the thing you tell Linux to execute as PID 1. Whether anybody else actually supports sysvinit is a different matter. I'm sure it will be around in Gentoo for a long time, and those with official Gentoo support contracts will get the same care they are used to. :) -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Sep 18, 2014 5:19 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: Rich Freeman rich0 at gentoo.org writes: Uh, the only thing the Linux kernel does is spawn a single process as PID 1 and offer a VERY STABLE system call interface for that and future processes to make requests. Nobody is going to break sysvinit if that happens to be the thing you tell Linux to execute as PID 1. OK, where are your performance studies on how wonderful systemd is? Simple (2) identical system except for systemd only on one. Run a wide variety of tests, publish the data. Publish perfomanced metrics; Choice; Unreasonable? The classic open source answer to being told to do a lot of work on publicly available data is do it yourself, youre not paying my bills you entitled . (paraphrased from code talks) Whether anybody else actually supports sysvinit is a different matter. I'm sure it will be around in Gentoo for a long time, and those with official Gentoo support contracts will get the same care they are used to. :) I'm not sure if this is a threat, a promise or are you just trash talkin with me now? Besides, there is another thing you are not considering. The world of embedded linux user linux. So, the embedded designers are all wonderfully in line with systemd? Have you been to any of those forums? They live by cgroups, because a few folks showed them how to minimize embedded systems with age old state diagrams. Have you offered them the systemd or highway plan yet? last i checked, systemd uses cgroups - its a central part of the service management bits. so what the frack are you on about? It's not me, Rich, it lots of other technically astute folks that are not happy. I just want choice. I hope systemd is wildly successful, but I'm old school, so you and others are going to have to show me. James
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Sep 18, 2014 5:36 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: Mark David Dumlao madumlao at gmail.com writes: Publish perfomanced metrics; Choice; Unreasonable? The classic open source answer to being told to do a lot of work on publicly available data is I'm sorry, I must have missed your link to the published data? Sure it exist and I have just missed it? Make it yourself you entitled dickwad. this is what you get for being polite to idiots.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 5:46 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: Mark David Dumlao madumlao at gmail.com writes: Publish perfomanced metrics; Choice; Unreasonable? The classic open source answer to being told to do a lot of work on publicly available data Ah, here is some of the tesing you are referring to? http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-March/017570.html Surely there is more? Please explian your position with published data and comments, as I am listening to you! My position is that you're an idiot and a troll. The code is out there. Freely available. Both systemd and sysvinit. If you wanted to measure both, you could, literally, in the time it took since you first posted in this thread till now you could have measured several times and left mean comments about whichever system you hated the most. You're the only one in this thread that's imposing on everyone to produce anything. You're the only one in this thread that SHOULD be producing anything. That's how open source works and that's how it's supposed to work. We're not your unpaid researchers. -- This email is:[ ] actionable [ ] fyi[ ] social Response needed: [ ] yes [ ] up to you [ ] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate[ ] soon [ ] none
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
Am 17.09.2014 um 23:42 schrieb Mark David Dumlao: On Sep 18, 2014 5:36 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com mailto:wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: Mark David Dumlao madumlao at gmail.com http://gmail.com writes: Publish perfomanced metrics; Choice; Unreasonable? The classic open source answer to being told to do a lot of work on publicly available data is I'm sorry, I must have missed your link to the published data? Sure it exist and I have just missed it? Make it yourself you entitled dickwad. this is what you get for being polite to idiots. well, you claim there is data. So provide at least a set of search terms to find it. Also some comparism of code size systemd vs init+ lets say metalog. Also, some explanation why it is a good idea to read the kernel command line and reuse commands from there. Like 'debug'.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 6:41 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: Am 17.09.2014 um 23:42 schrieb Mark David Dumlao: On Sep 18, 2014 5:36 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: Mark David Dumlao madumlao at gmail.com writes: Publish perfomanced metrics; Choice; Unreasonable? The classic open source answer to being told to do a lot of work on publicly available data is I'm sorry, I must have missed your link to the published data? Sure it exist and I have just missed it? Make it yourself you entitled dickwad. this is what you get for being polite to idiots. well, you claim there is data. So provide at least a set of search terms to find it. There is the code and his system, and it's all the data he needs. Also some comparism of code size systemd vs init+ lets say metalog. Also, some explanation why it is a good idea to read the kernel command line and reuse commands from there. Like 'debug'. You're just as bad as him. No seriously, people like to talk about how high the signal to noise ratio of the gentoo mailing list is, and it would be much higher if not for trolls like you putting in so much noise and distraction. Canek has been patient as all heck for so many years now, even down to the point of manning up and providing public ebuilds for systemd integration, even an overlay that allowed sysvinit and systemd to integrate better, while you naysayers whine more and more about how he practically doesn't cook breakfast for you. Separating init functions from openrc? Canek's helped a big deal with that. It's a disgrace and you really ought to be ashamed of yourself for harassing someone who _actually provided code_ while you just piled more and more bullshit on his plate. And now here he is again, being patient to a fault, pointing out that one of the excuses we've seen again, and again, and again, and again hoisted on him - that Linus doesn't like something therefore its bad - is actually false, again providing sources to back up what he's saying while you piddle your Unix plattitudes, and now what? Harass him to do even more unpaid research again? I hate to see people abused like this. He won't swear so I'm going to do it for him since I've gotten sick of this circle-jerking mailing list. Stop being a jerk and acting like it's cool. He wants data? It's not hard to produce it. Install systemd and sysvinit side by side (something Canek helped become possible), boot once to openrc and boot another to systemd. If there's no difference, YOU publish it and be open to public scrutiny, not him. -- This email is:[ ] actionable [ ] fyi[ ] social Response needed: [ ] yes [ ] up to you [ ] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate[ ] soon [ ] none
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 5:18 PM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: Rich Freeman rich0 at gentoo.org writes: On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:28 PM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: Linus should make a clear, leadership statement that there will always be a path for folks to use another mechanism besides systemd in the linux kernel; This does not have to be a systemd vs cgroups discussion, but it being presented this way. A clear statement of multiplicity will put this issue to rest once and for all. By not stating clearly was is obvious, many technically astute folks are looking for options. Surely a fork is emminent and it will most likely be the best thing to happen to linux, as the entire kernel development process has become tainted by those with billions of dollars. Uh, the only thing the Linux kernel does is spawn a single process as PID 1 and offer a VERY STABLE system call interface for that and future processes to make requests. Nobody is going to break sysvinit if that happens to be the thing you tell Linux to execute as PID 1. OK, where are your performance studies on how wonderful systemd is? Simple (2) identical system except for systemd only on one. Run a wide variety of tests, publish the data. Publish perfomanced metrics; Choice; Unreasonable? What does your reply have to do with my email? You asked for a clear statement from Linus that there will always be a way to boot linux without systemd. I simply stated that this was nonsensical, because there is nothing specific to any init implementation in linux. Linux is a kernel, and it launches exactly one process. All the stuff you're arguing about happens in userspace. Sure, sooner or later kdbus is likely to be added to the kernel, but just like dbus nobody has to use it, and I'm sure like anything else in the kernel you won't have to build it if you don't want it. I really could care less about impressing you with systemd metrics. If you want to believe that it has no value, fine. Whether anybody else actually supports sysvinit is a different matter. I'm sure it will be around in Gentoo for a long time, and those with official Gentoo support contracts will get the same care they are used to. :) I'm not sure if this is a threat, a promise or are you just trash talkin with me now? Hint, the :) means that I'm joking. My point is that nothing is going to break sysvinit, but that doesn't mean that somebody is going to build a fancy Linux system for you based on it. The fact is that nobody is paying a dime to use Gentoo linux, and whether sysvinit is or isn't supported, in practice the amount of guaranteed support you're going to get for it either way is zero. Nobody is threatening to kill your kitten. Nobody is offering to feed it forever, either. There are plenty of Gentoo devs who prefer sysvinit, so I doubt it will go away anytime soon. Gentoo is about choice. But, over the years there have also been plenty of choices that went away. If you REALLY care about sysvinit then you should consider contributing more than emails. Besides, there is another thing you are not considering. The world of embedded linux user linux. So, the embedded designers are all wonderfully in line with systemd? Have you been to any of those forums? They live by cgroups, because a few folks showed them how to minimize embedded systems with age old state diagrams. Have you offered them the systemd or highway plan yet? So, the only widespread consumer devices that I'm aware of that run Gentoo derivatives run neither sysvinit nor systemd - they run upstart, despite upstart not even being in the portage tree, or a single upstart configuration script. Heck, they probably sell more devices running upstart than there are devices running Ubuntu. Sure, that isn't really what I'd call embedded, but my point is that people doing embedded work are going to tailor whatever they have to in order to get the results they want. I wouldn't be surprised if many of embedded devices don't even run sysvinit. Gentoo is a great starting point for an embedded system precisely because it is so adaptable, but we don't have any configurations that I'd really call plug and play for the embedded world, nor do I think such a one-size-fits-all configuration is even possible when you're concerned about every byte of RAM or milliwatt of power. It's not me, Rich, it lots of other technically astute folks that are not happy. I just want choice. Sure, and I'd like a pony. The fact is that on Gentoo you have choice. You may or may not have it forever, but nobody is paying for Gentoo so nobody can count on ANYTHING in Gentoo being around forever. You'll have it as long as somebody cares to support it. We allow proxy maintainers - that somebody could even be you. Nobody owes anybody a roadmap for a community-based distro. If you want somebody to owe you something then use a distro that is commercially supported. Of course, if your
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 7:11 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: Mark David Dumlao madumlao at gmail.com writes: You're the only one in this thread that's imposing on everyone to produce anything. You're the only one in this thread that SHOULD be producing anything. That's how open source works and that's how it's supposed to work. We're not your unpaid researchers. I'm sorry, Volker pointed out that the pro systemd folks came to gentoo-user, waiving linux's dirty panties around. We ask a few simple questions, now you result to name calling? There is no gentoo-user separate from pro systemd folks. You made that up. pro systemd folks have been part of gentoo user for years and years now, and they've been harassed repeatedly with simple loaded questions based on wrong assumptions for years and years now. You know all those bits I mentioned to Volker about people getting FHS wrong, or not bothering to read man pages, or not giving a crap what an init thingy was and throwing public tantrums on it? I didn't make those up. They're here, on this list, and I've had to wade in that crap for a few years, and even in those threads where I only intended to give practical advice like if you want to load udev earlier, you could write an init script for it... or something to that effect. Only to be heaped by plateful after plateful of vitriolic, _technically empty_ crap and callbacks to Unix platitudes half the sayers don't even understand that well. Fact of the matter is systemd isn't invading gentoo, it's part of it now, and has been for quite a while. All those big changes many people have been sore about on this list could have been turned into complete non-problems if we took all the smart-brains time spent arguing this point to instead write integration packages the way Canek did. -- This email is:[ ] actionable [ ] fyi[ ] social Response needed: [ ] yes [ ] up to you [ ] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate[ ] soon [ ] none
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
Mark David Dumlao wrote: The code is out there. Freely available. Both systemd and sysvinit. If you wanted to measure both, you could, literally, in the time it took since you first posted in this thread till now you could have measured several times and left mean comments about whichever system you hated the most. Unfortunately, the systemd guys keep screaming that systemd is faster, and burden of proof is on the party that's claiming something. It's not James'/Volker's responsibility to prove that systemd isn't faster. That said, you guys need to stop flaming. If anything, it's easy to dislike SysVInit because the init scripts it uses are piles of bash, compared to a Systemd init script that has a handful of systemd config. Is systemd starting to encompass too much? I think so, but who cares? If we want an init manager that reads systemd-like files but doesn't do anything else (hostnamectl, logging, udev, etc.), I guess we'll have to make one. Alec
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Alec Ten Harmsel a...@alectenharmsel.com wrote: Mark David Dumlao wrote: The code is out there. Freely available. Both systemd and sysvinit. If you wanted to measure both, you could, literally, in the time it took since you first posted in this thread till now you could have measured several times and left mean comments about whichever system you hated the most. Unfortunately, the systemd guys keep screaming that systemd is faster, and burden of proof is on the party that's claiming something. It's not James'/Volker's responsibility to prove that systemd isn't faster. I think Mark fully appreciates that if he wants to change your mind he's going to have to work hard to do it. I just don't think he really cares. The argument about whether systemd is better/worse than sysvinit was a debate back in 2012-2013. Just about anybody actually contributing to distros has moved on since then. That doesn't mean that there is 100% agreement on anything, just that at this point it seems unlikely that things are going to change much either way on that front. A few distros are likely to avoid systemd, and the vast majority are in the process of adopting it. With Gentoo you can run whatever you want for PID 1, just as you can use whatever bootloader, kernel, syslog, etc you want. Not all the init options have equal support - upstart isn't even in the tree and few packages supply scripts for runit. But, nobody is going to get in anybody's way if they want to introduce upstart, etc. The fact is among those actually contributing to projects like openrc, udev, eudev, and systemd everybody tends to get along just fine. There is plenty of interest in finding common ground and collaborating so that anybody switching from one to another can do so easily, and so that these projects don't diverge where it isn't intended. It seems like the heaviest fighting seems to involve folks who don't contribute to any of these. -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 8:54 AM, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Alec Ten Harmsel a...@alectenharmsel.com wrote: Mark David Dumlao wrote: The code is out there. Freely available. Both systemd and sysvinit. If you wanted to measure both, you could, literally, in the time it took since you first posted in this thread till now you could have measured several times and left mean comments about whichever system you hated the most. Unfortunately, the systemd guys keep screaming that systemd is faster, and burden of proof is on the party that's claiming something. It's not James'/Volker's responsibility to prove that systemd isn't faster. I think Mark fully appreciates that if he wants to change your mind he's going to have to work hard to do it. I just don't think he really cares. The argument about whether systemd is better/worse than sysvinit was a debate back in 2012-2013. Just about anybody actually contributing to distros has moved on since then. That doesn't mean that there is 100% agreement on anything, just that at this point it seems unlikely that things are going to change much either way on that front. A few distros are likely to avoid systemd, and the vast majority are in the process of adopting it. Yeah Rich gets it. systemd guys keep screaming that systemd is faster seems to imply that most of us give a tweet what PID1 you're running. When we don't. Most often what happens is some news on systemd developments comes up, people say yay!, and other people say you're destroying Linux and gonna doom us all and they act all righteous when we say uh, what? like it matters to us what you're running. Fact is if it's _you_ that seems to give a tweet about systemd speed, so it's on _you_ to measure it, I don't really care what you think. The fact that you think pid1's speed or resource usage might be a big deal is very indicative on how badly informed you are in the first place. It reminds me a lot of how some communities treat Gentoo users, asking them to off the bat produce speed benchmarks comparing them to Arch or whatnot. As if the Gentoo users gave a tweet about what other users run on their machines in their own time... no, they very largely don't and there's no good reason for them to be convincing other people about it. -- This email is:[ ] actionable [ ] fyi[ ] social Response needed: [ ] yes [ ] up to you [ ] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate[ ] soon [ ] none
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On 09/17/2014 10:40 PM, Mark David Dumlao wrote: Fact is if it's _you_ that seems to give a tweet about systemd speed, so it's on _you_ to measure it, I don't really care what you think. The fact that you think pid1's speed or resource usage might be a big deal is very indicative on how badly informed you are in the first place. I don't care about systemd speed. I really am completely ambivalent about PID1; I've run Upstart, I've run systemd, I've run OpenRC, and they all work fine. All I'm saying is that a common point in the systemd community seems to be its awesome performance (unless I'm reading the wrong documentation and conversations), and burden of proof is on the party making the claim. But also, caring about speed and resource usage are important. If one of the three PID1s I've mentioned took 30 seconds to boot my system, I would not use it. If it took 10% of my RAM, I would not use it. Lucky for us, all three are fast enough and have a small enough footprint that it doesn't matter which is used. Alec
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On 18/09/14 03:12, Alec Ten Harmsel wrote: Mark David Dumlao wrote: The code is out there. Freely available. Both systemd and sysvinit. If you wanted to measure both, you could, literally, in the time it took since you first posted in this thread till now you could have measured several times and left mean comments about whichever system you hated the most. Unfortunately, the systemd guys keep screaming that systemd is faster, and burden of proof is on the party that's claiming something. It's not James'/Volker's responsibility to prove that systemd isn't faster. That said, you guys need to stop flaming. If anything, it's easy to dislike SysVInit because the init scripts it uses are piles of bash, compared to a Systemd init script that has a handful of systemd config. Is systemd starting to encompass too much? I think so, but who cares? If we want an init manager that reads systemd-like files but doesn't do anything else (hostnamectl, logging, udev, etc.), I guess we'll have to make one. Alec Notably Gentoo has never used entire SysV, only the init part, not the /etc.d/rc.d part So this POSIX sh script's are coming from dedicated *Gentoo* project, which is sys-apps/openrc Just clarifying
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On 18/09/14 07:52, Samuli Suominen wrote: Notably Gentoo has never used entire SysV, only the init part, not the /etc.d/rc.d part I meant /etc/rc.d of course. Typing error. Sorry.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Linus Torvalds on systemd
On 18/09/2014 02:12, Alec Ten Harmsel wrote: Mark David Dumlao wrote: The code is out there. Freely available. Both systemd and sysvinit. If you wanted to measure both, you could, literally, in the time it took since you first posted in this thread till now you could have measured several times and left mean comments about whichever system you hated the most. Unfortunately, the systemd guys keep screaming that systemd is faster, and burden of proof is on the party that's claiming something. It's not James'/Volker's responsibility to prove that systemd isn't faster. That said, you guys need to stop flaming. If anything, it's easy to dislike SysVInit because the init scripts it uses are piles of bash, compared to a Systemd init script that has a handful of systemd config. Is systemd starting to encompass too much? I think so, but who cares? If we want an init manager that reads systemd-like files but doesn't do anything else (hostnamectl, logging, udev, etc.), I guess we'll have to make one. or trim it back. Conceptually, it shouldn't be too hard to remove those extra services leaving only an init manager. Reading posts over the years (I don't use systemd) most of that stuff can be disabled by config in systemd anyway -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
