On 10/01/2012 11:22 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Am Montag, den 01.10.2012, 04:24 +0200 schrieb John Spencer: >> On 10/01/2012 03:14 AM, Bill Kenworthy wrote: >>> Does LXDE have a position on systemd/udev etc? >> >> it's a PoS, designed by the hallucinating lennart 'mezcalero' poettering >> who constantly tries to shove his shit down our throats. > > How so? Does anybody force you to use his software?
that seems to be the plan: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2012-August/006066.html "(Yes, udev on non-systemd systems is in our eyes a dead end, in case you haven't noticed it yet. I am looking forward to the day when we can drop that support entirely.)" -- Poettering to use X, Y, and Z, I need udev, and as soon as udev is no longer usable without systemd, I am forced to use systemd in order to use X, Y, and Z. this is how red hat operates: invent overengineered layer of bloat nobody (i.e. less than 0.1% of users) needs, let dependencies creep into other packages that they control (or let fanboys do the job), until there's no way around said PoS anymore. heck, even if thousands of users *needed* a network-transparent audio daemon, that doesn't justify it being installed in almost any distro (without any means to configure it) by *default*, always-on, constantly getting in your way, and compiled into hundreds of packages. > >> almost everything that's broken around the linux desktop is his invention. > > Such as? pulseaudio, dbus, *kit, you name it. >> >> that's just FUD. there are and will be distros that dont bow down to the >> red hat/freedesktop dictatorship. the more resist, the better. > > Your statement makes me wonder if you really understand FLOSS. It's not > and has never been democracy, not every random individual has the same > rights. Of course everyone can state his or her opinion - and that > includes even you and your rant - but at the end of the day those who do > the work set the pace and direction. If your code is good, people will > adopt it. This has absolutely nothing to do with dictatorship, it's yes, in a perfect, well-informed world good code would win, or at least bad ideas/code would not become popular. in a non-perfect world, due to bigger influence and propaganda machinery, you get dbus, pulseaudio & co shoved down your throat, if you like it or not. > meritocracy at it's best. meritocracy implies merit, and that can't be said about poettering code. "Every time I hear of yet another one of Poettering's fads, I can't help but remember the Henry Spencer quote "Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.". Poettering is a near-perfect exemplar of that." -- cas (http://lwn.net/Articles/468381/) > >> the binary syslog is just stupid. > > That is the claim. Where is your reasoning? simple: it can't be processed by the standard UNIX tools. to access the logs from *your own* code, you either have to reverse engineer the format, read thousands of lines of horribly complex, inefficient and ugly GNU-formatted [sic] code, or wait for someone to come up with library that is possible to use sanely. but you still have to write a special program to parse it, instead of a shell one-liner. we should not strive to make existing systems more complicated, we should strive to make them so simple that a single human, not working at Red Hat, in a reasonable amount of time, 1) can understand how all the pieces work together, 2) is able to build it from scratch. > >> there's nothing more flexible than a shell script started by pid 1 >> (init), which can be as slim as ~20 lines of C code. > > sysv's init has around 3200 lines of code. Would you mind showing me an > init implementation with 20 lines of code? here's a ~10 line version of init.c that Rich Felker (author of musl libc), authored and shared: #define _XOPEN_SOURCE 700 #include <signal.h> #include <unistd.h> int main() { sigset_t set; int status; if (getpid() != 1) return 1; sigfillset(&set); sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK, &set, 0); if (fork()) for (;;) wait(&status); sigprocmask(SIG_UNBLOCK, &set, 0); setsid(); setpgid(0, 0); return execve("/etc/rc", (char *[]){ "rc", 0 }, (char *[]){ 0 }); } as you can see, this is totally robust - no dynamic memory, simple, small (statically linked against musl libc: 5 KB), and flexible - you're free to use whatever you want as /etc/rc, as long as it is executable... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Don't let slow site performance ruin your business. Deploy New Relic APM Deploy New Relic app performance management and know exactly what is happening inside your Ruby, Python, PHP, Java, and .NET app Try New Relic at no cost today and get our sweet Data Nerd shirt too! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Lxde-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxde-list
