subject:"\[arch\-general\] Lennart Poettering on udev\-systemd"

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 08:58:41AM -0400, Baho Utot wrote:
 Yes looks like I will need to migrate to BSD

I've already begun using FreeBSD.  Only real complaint I have is that my 
notmuch database isn't backwards compatible with the one they have in ports.   
Other than that, it's been a smooth transition.

I was always most attracted to arch by its proximity to the BSD's.  With all 
this talk of systemd, I felt it was time to bring that proximity to fruition.

Arch remains on my laptop for the time being.  I have fond memories of Arch 
that I hope do not dwindle.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Thu, 2012-08-09 at 13:13 -0600, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:
 On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 08:58:41AM -0400, Baho Utot wrote:
  Yes looks like I will need to migrate to BSD
 
 I've already begun using FreeBSD.  Only real complaint I have is that
 my notmuch database isn't backwards compatible with the one they have
 in ports.   Other than that, it's been a smooth transition.
 
 I was always most attracted to arch by its proximity to the BSD's.
 With all this talk of systemd, I felt it was time to bring that
 proximity to fruition.
 
 Arch remains on my laptop for the time being.  I have fond memories of
 Arch that I hope do not dwindle.

I suspect that BSD for artist that draw can be used, but for audio not.
Am I mistaken?

Regards,
Ralf

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Monday 13 Aug 2012 12:34:26 Joakim Hernberg wrote:
 On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 15:50:16 +0530

 Alternatively we will all be running systemd one day whether we
 want to or not :(  I suspect that this has been the game plan all the
 time though.  OK, flames away I guess :)

Wow, this sounds so much like a conspiracy theory.  The fact is that the 
people who write the code inevitably dictate which software is maintained, 
based on their interests and convictions, and they're pretty much unanimous 
that systemd is a better solution to the problem of booting and maintaining 
daemons than the solution we currently have.

So yeah, I guess that's been the game plan all along: make booting and daemon 
control more consistent, faster, and easier for most users to maintain.

Paul

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 13:45 +0100, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
 and easier for most users to maintain

USERS? I'm a stupid user. I guess you're talking about experts. For
USERS it's hard to follow changes every half year. We stupid users
simply want to use the computer. We are willing to learn, but we won't
start from the beginning, every half year.

Btw. I'm a computer dino, so for me nothing is bad with the obsolete
PASCAL style of the configs. Oh wait, I always hated to program Pascal.

CheersRalf

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

2012-08-14 Thread Jelle van der Waa

On 08/14/12 14:59, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
 On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 13:45 +0100, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
 and easier for most users to maintain
 
 USERS? I'm a stupid user. I guess you're talking about experts. For
 USERS it's hard to follow changes every half year. We stupid users
 simply want to use the computer. We are willing to learn, but we won't
 start from the beginning, every half year.
 
 Btw. I'm a computer dino, so for me nothing is bad with the obsolete
 PASCAL style of the configs. Oh wait, I always hated to program Pascal.
 
 CheersRalf
 
 
 
Tell me what's hard about systemd?


Ah well as soon as RHEL switches to systemd, more and more distro's will
switch, so soon you might have to use it ;) (So better learn it now :p )

-- 
Jelle van der Waa



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd


On 08/14/2012 08:45 AM, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:

On Monday 13 Aug 2012 12:34:26 Joakim Hernberg wrote:

On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 15:50:16 +0530

Alternatively we will all be running systemd one day whether we
want to or not :(  I suspect that this has been the game plan all the
time though.  OK, flames away I guess :)

Wow, this sounds so much like a conspiracy theory.  The fact is that the
people who write the code inevitably dictate which software is maintained,
based on their interests and convictions, and they're pretty much unanimous
that systemd is a better solution to the problem of booting and maintaining
daemons than the solution we currently have.

So yeah, I guess that's been the game plan all along: make booting and daemon
control more consistent, faster, and easier for most users to maintain.

Paul


I don't understand your point

What is so wrong with the booting using sysvinit?

I really don't need what systemd offers and sysvinit does everything I 
need and has not failed me.


So is your point that I need to move to systemd because the developers 
tell me I must?


As for systemd being better solution for the problem of booting the 
beauty is in the eye of the beholder and I just don't see it, so why 
take away sysvint?


You can use systemd and I should be able to use what works for me and 
not be forced down the systemd path.


Isn't this what open source software freedom is all about or did I miss 
somethingI have use linux from the redhat 5.2 (no I am not talking 
the enterprise version) days.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd


On 08/09/2012 03:13 PM, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 08:58:41AM -0400, Baho Utot wrote:

Yes looks like I will need to migrate to BSD

I've already begun using FreeBSD.  Only real complaint I have is that my 
notmuch database isn't backwards compatible with the one they have in ports.   
Other than that, it's been a smooth transition.

I was always most attracted to arch by its proximity to the BSD's.  With all 
this talk of systemd, I felt it was time to bring that proximity to fruition.

Arch remains on my laptop for the time being.  I have fond memories of Arch 
that I hope do not dwindle.


I think Arch was good back in the day.

Now not so good.

I have stopped using arch except for one server that does mail and DNS. 
It is presently being moved to my own linux distro based on LFS and 
using pacman for the package manager.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 15:05 +0200, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
 So better learn it now :p

That might be true, since I don't think I have a choice, e.g. switching
to BSD seems no alternative for my needs.

I should install a second Arch with full Poettering code ... take some
drugs, e.g. Diazepam ... and then learn.

I'm still waiting for some Russian spam, that offers similar drugs.

Regards,
Ralf

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd


On 08/14/2012 08:59 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 13:45 +0100, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:

and easier for most users to maintain

USERS? I'm a stupid user. I guess you're talking about experts. For
USERS it's hard to follow changes every half year. We stupid users
simply want to use the computer. We are willing to learn, but we won't
start from the beginning, every half year.

Btw. I'm a computer dino, so for me nothing is bad with the obsolete
PASCAL style of the configs. Oh wait, I always hated to program Pascal.

CheersRalf





Aye yes pascal, learned a lot from that language I did.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd


On 08/14/2012 09:05 AM, Jelle van der Waa wrote:

On 08/14/12 14:59, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 13:45 +0100, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:

and easier for most users to maintain

USERS? I'm a stupid user. I guess you're talking about experts. For
USERS it's hard to follow changes every half year. We stupid users
simply want to use the computer. We are willing to learn, but we won't
start from the beginning, every half year.

Btw. I'm a computer dino, so for me nothing is bad with the obsolete
PASCAL style of the configs. Oh wait, I always hated to program Pascal.

CheersRalf




Tell me what's hard about systemd?


Ah well as soon as RHEL switches to systemd, more and more distro's will
switch, so soon you might have to use it ;) (So better learn it now :p )



Or switch to something else.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 03:05:02PM +0200, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
 Tell me what's hard about systemd?

I think what he was saying wasn't that systemd is hard but switching is hard 
irrespectively of what you're switching to.  

That's my inference anyway.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 09:12:30AM -0400, Baho Utot wrote:
 I have stopped using arch except for one server that does mail and DNS. 
 It is presently being moved to my own linux distro based on LFS and 
 using pacman for the package manager.

Oooh!  Link?

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 09:13 -0400, Baho Utot wrote:
 On 08/14/2012 08:59 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
  On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 13:45 +0100, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
  and easier for most users to maintain
  USERS? I'm a stupid user. I guess you're talking about experts. For
  USERS it's hard to follow changes every half year. We stupid users
  simply want to use the computer. We are willing to learn, but we won't
  start from the beginning, every half year.
 
  Btw. I'm a computer dino, so for me nothing is bad with the obsolete
  PASCAL style of the configs. Oh wait, I always hated to program Pascal.
 
  CheersRalf
 
 
 
 
 Aye yes pascal, learned a lot from that language I did.
 
 

WritingPascalSavesAlotOfSpaceButTheCodeTendsToBecomeUnreadable.
OkPascalCaseIsnTtheOnlyIssueWithPascalItEgAlsoTeachedUsToDoTheWorkTheCompilerShouldDoRegardingToEgVariables.
ImightBeMistakenSinceIonlyTestedPascalWithTheC64AndDecidedToUseAssemblerInstead.
RegardsRalf

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 02:37:54PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
 I suspect that BSD for artist that draw can be used, but for audio not.
 Am I mistaken?

I'm not sure I understand the question.

There's a lot of audio software in FreeBSD.  Whether any of it suits your 
purposes, I can not say.

http://www.freebsd.org/ports/

Arch certainly has great stuff in this department.  The AUR's full of decent 
packages.  But I'm not really an artist interested in audio so I can't say 
how any of it compares.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tuesday 14 Aug 2012 09:12:30 Baho Utot wrote:
 I think Arch was good back in the day.
 
 Now not so good.

This sounds a bit inflammatory and over-generalised.  Presumably what you don't 
like about Arch now is the fact that it will potentially change its default 
init system sometime in the not-too-distant future?  I'd be interested to hear 
if there's anything else that has made you switch.

 I have stopped using arch except for one server that does mail and DNS.
 It is presently being moved to my own linux distro based on LFS and
 using pacman for the package manager.

I'm genuinely curious about this: if you're using pacman as the package 
manager, are you building your own packages and hosting your own package 
repository, or are you using the standard Arch repositories?  If it's the 
latter, it sounds like you'd end up with an Arch system that happened to be 
bootstrapped using LFS...

Paul

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd


On 08/14/2012 09:23 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 09:13 -0400, Baho Utot wrote:

On 08/14/2012 08:59 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 13:45 +0100, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:

and easier for most users to maintain

USERS? I'm a stupid user. I guess you're talking about experts. For
USERS it's hard to follow changes every half year. We stupid users
simply want to use the computer. We are willing to learn, but we won't
start from the beginning, every half year.

Btw. I'm a computer dino, so for me nothing is bad with the obsolete
PASCAL style of the configs. Oh wait, I always hated to program Pascal.

CheersRalf




Aye yes pascal, learned a lot from that language I did.



WritingPascalSavesAlotOfSpaceButTheCodeTendsToBecomeUnreadable.
OkPascalCaseIsnTtheOnlyIssueWithPascalItEgAlsoTeachedUsToDoTheWorkTheCompilerShouldDoRegardingToEgVariables.
ImightBeMistakenSinceIonlyTestedPascalWithTheC64AndDecidedToUseAssemblerInstead.
RegardsRalf




What no turbo pascal?

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 15:23 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
 On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 09:13 -0400, Baho Utot wrote:
  On 08/14/2012 08:59 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
   On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 13:45 +0100, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
   and easier for most users to maintain
   USERS? I'm a stupid user. I guess you're talking about experts. For
   USERS it's hard to follow changes every half year. We stupid users
   simply want to use the computer. We are willing to learn, but we won't
   start from the beginning, every half year.
  
   Btw. I'm a computer dino, so for me nothing is bad with the obsolete
   PASCAL style of the configs. Oh wait, I always hated to program Pascal.
  
   CheersRalf
  
  
  
  
  Aye yes pascal, learned a lot from that language I did.
  
  
 
 WritingPascalSavesAlotOfSpaceButTheCodeTendsToBecomeUnreadable.
 OkPascalCaseIsnTtheOnlyIssueWithPascalItEgAlsoTeachedUsToDoTheWorkTheCompilerShouldDoRegardingToEgVariables.
 ImightBeMistakenSinceIonlyTestedPascalWithTheC64AndDecidedToUseAssemblerInstead.
 RegardsRalf

PS: To be fair, IIRC for the C64's Pascal everything was uppercase,
hence it was much more fun.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

2012-08-14 Thread Jelle van der Waa

On 08/09/12 22:00, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:
 I think what he was saying wasn't that systemd is hard but switching is hard 
 irrespectively of what you're switching to.  
Because the devs made systemd being able to use rc.conf?

It takes less then a day to use systemd, but I am not forcing you to use it.

-- 
Jelle van der Waa



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

2012-08-14 Thread Bjoern Franke

Am Dienstag, den 14.08.2012, 14:59 +0200 schrieb Ralf Mardorf:
 On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 13:45 +0100, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
  and easier for most users to maintain
 
 USERS? I'm a stupid user. I guess you're talking about experts. For
 USERS it's hard to follow changes every half year. We stupid users
 simply want to use the computer. We are willing to learn, but we won't
 start from the beginning, every half year.

Oh no, not again the discussion arch will be usable for experts only
due to systemd.


-- 
xmpp: b...@schafweide.org
bjo.nord-west.org | nord-west.org | freifunk-ol.de

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

2012-08-14 Thread Thomas Bächler

Am 14.08.2012 15:08, schrieb Baho Utot:
 Wow, this sounds so much like a conspiracy theory.  The fact is that the
 people who write the code inevitably dictate which software is
 maintained,
 based on their interests and convictions, and they're pretty much
 unanimous
 that systemd is a better solution to the problem of booting and
 maintaining
 daemons than the solution we currently have.

 So yeah, I guess that's been the game plan all along: make booting and
 daemon
 control more consistent, faster, and easier for most users to maintain.

 Paul
 
 I don't understand your point
 
 What is so wrong with the booting using sysvinit?
 
 I really don't need what systemd offers and sysvinit does everything I
 need and has not failed me.

And you don't want systemd because you are sure it won't do what
sysvinit can, even though you didn't try it.

 So is your point that I need to move to systemd because the developers
 tell me I must?

You need to move because the rest of the Linux ecosystem will require
systemd at some point, just like it now requires udev. If you don't like
it, then stop annoying us and start maintaining code that makes sure
YOUR way will keep working.

It's like that: Whoever contributes code makes the decisions.

 As for systemd being better solution for the problem of booting the
 beauty is in the eye of the beholder and I just don't see it, so why
 take away sysvint?

I could repeat what I said above.

 You can use systemd and I should be able to use what works for me and
 not be forced down the systemd path.

So, you are annoying the whole mailing list because you don't like that
you _might_ be forced to switch to a superior booting scheme which is
unlikely to affect you negatively in any way.

Arch's policy on systemd vs. initscripts has not even been discussed
among Arch developers yet, and nothing has been decided. Yet, you guys
are acting like someone's going to eat your childrn.

I can't stand this anymore. I want to just add replaces=('initscripts')
to the systemd package just to make this fucking discussion stop. If
you don't have anything _technical_ to discuss, and don't have any
problem that you want help solving, then move this bullshit somewhere I
don't have to see it.

I wonder if there is a way to lock a thread in mailman.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd


On 08/09/2012 04:02 PM, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 09:12:30AM -0400, Baho Utot wrote:

I have stopped using arch except for one server that does mail and DNS.
It is presently being moved to my own linux distro based on LFS and
using pacman for the package manager.

Oooh!  Link?



I will have it posted on github when I am done.

I have one small issue with transfering from the build tool chain to the 
chroot system under build then I can commit it to github.
It has to do with the pacman db being stored in the build tool chain.  I 
will fix that when I get the time (soon).


Other than that it works!

What I have now on githut is an older way, it works but is not so good 
for building updated version.


I am looking to wrap it up after LFS-7.2 which is due out beginning of 
Sept. This year ;)

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 09:08:36AM -0400, Baho Utot wrote:
 What is so wrong with the booting using sysvinit?
 
As a critic of systemd, perhaps I can help.

Init scripts tend to wreck the determinism beacuse they can inherit
your env.  pid files are a problem waiting to happen.  There really
is nothing preventing them from getting trampled or deleted and 
then you've gotta go kill daemon processes by hand.

Having to start daemons in a certain order is obnoxious.

The more shell script you have to write in order to get daemons up
(or shut 'em down) just means more opportunity for little annoying
bugs.

Startup speed is therefore affected.  This doesn't matter if you
don't reboot often but if you're doing lots of systems dev, it can
be said that every minute spent waiting for the system to boot is
one less minute spent improving your software.

 I really don't need what systemd offers and sysvinit does everything I 
 need and has not failed me.
 
Indeed, this is a values judgment.  The argument for abandoning
init scripts could be made in the department of Code
Correctness as it is defined in the Arch Way...

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/The_Arch_Way

There is no doubt that the community-tested traditions have
found their way into effectiveness.  

 As for systemd being better solution for the problem of booting the 
 beauty is in the eye of the beholder and I just don't see it, so why 
 take away sysvint?
 
I'm still experimenting with daemontools under sysvinit as I
described here:

https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=141831

The transition seems less brutal, the ability to start things
in parallel is there, supervision is there, but there is no
process grouping (which I consider unimportant) as with systemd.

 You can use systemd and I should be able to use what works for me and 
 not be forced down the systemd path.
 
As explained in this and other threads, it may not be a decision
we, in the Arch world, get to make.  Too much of upstream may
actually be dictated by what a comercially-backed distro does.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 09:26 -0400, Baho Utot wrote:
 What no turbo pascal?

No. Some time later I switched to the Atari ST with a 80286 hardware
emulator and tested Turbo C++ on DR DOS.

Today I'm just a user, I don't wish to learn how to program nowadays
computers, I simply wish to use the computer as multi-tool for my needs.

I'm able to write naive shell scripts that do what I want them to do.
I'm even not willing to learn how to write good shell scripts, I only
want to use the computer.

Poettering isn't a help, he's a PITA regarding to my needs.

Regards,
Ralf

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 03:32:42PM +0200, Thomas B?chler wrote:
 And you don't want systemd because you are sure it won't do what
 sysvinit can, even though you didn't try it.
 

I think the complaint here is that the switch itself is a problem.

I think he made it rather clear that he's not criticizing systemd
itself but the notion of forcing a switch. 

I've been bellowing to local linux user groups and friends that
sysvinit needs to go for years but I understand the general 
resistance:  Every change -- even the especially good and worthy
ones -- requires effort.  For some, that's too much.

 Arch's policy on systemd vs. initscripts has not even been discussed
 among Arch developers yet...

This is really all that needed to be said.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tuesday 14 Aug 2012 09:08:36 Baho Utot wrote:
 I don't understand your point
 
 What is so wrong with the booting using sysvinit?
 
 I really don't need what systemd offers and sysvinit does everything I
 need and has not failed me.

There's nothing inherently wrong with it, just like there was nothing 
inherently wrong with pen and paper before computers came along.  Many people 
would argue that pen and paper does everything they need, but that doesn't 
change the fact that most people find computers more flexible.  Those wanting 
to 
stick to pen and paper find themselves increasingly frustrated that they can't 
get by without a computer.  It's not that they're not *entitled* to their 
opinion, it's just that everyone else has moved on.  It's not a conspiracy; 
things simply change.  Maybe you don't see the advantage, but other people do.

 So is your point that I need to move to systemd because the developers
 tell me I must?

My point is that you need to move to systemd because if you don't, you'll be 
using a system that noone is willing to maintain.

 As for systemd being better solution for the problem of booting the
 beauty is in the eye of the beholder and I just don't see it, so why
 take away sysvint?

Sysvinit will not be taken away.  However, as is the way of software, if 
sysvinit is not actively maintained, it will simply stop working in a matter 
of years.

 You can use systemd and I should be able to use what works for me and
 not be forced down the systemd path.

Unwanted change is not nice.  In fact, I haven't switched to systemd yet 
because I'm worried about the switch (even though I've heard it's pretty 
easy), and sysvinit works OK for me right now.  However, I'm also interested 
in discovering what all this new stuff is that everyone promises systemd can 
deliver, so I'm happy with the idea that I'll switch at some point.

 Isn't this what open source software freedom is all about or did I miss
 somethingI have use linux from the redhat 5.2 (no I am not talking
 the enterprise version) days.

No, open source software is not about giving you whatever software you want.  
It's about producing whatever software you want, and letting anyone use it.  
If you're willing to maintain Sysvinit, you're absolutely free to do that.  It 
may well be that someone *will* be willing to do that when the time comes.  In 
the meantime, I'm afraid your only choice is to use the software that is 
maintained.

Paul

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd


On 08/14/2012 09:25 AM, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:

On Tuesday 14 Aug 2012 09:12:30 Baho Utot wrote:

I think Arch was good back in the day.

Now not so good.

This sounds a bit inflammatory and over-generalised.  Presumably what you don't
like about Arch now is the fact that it will potentially change its default
init system sometime in the not-too-distant future?  I'd be interested to hear
if there's anything else that has made you switch.


I have not liked what  arch has turned into for some time now, approx 
2-3 years.
It is not meant as This sounds a bit inflammatory and 
over-generalised  arch just doesn't fit my needs now and I don't care 
for the direction...That's all.

I starting switching well before this systemd  the change started.




I have stopped using arch except for one server that does mail and DNS.
It is presently being moved to my own linux distro based on LFS and
using pacman for the package manager.

I'm genuinely curious about this: if you're using pacman as the package
manager, are you building your own packages and hosting your own package
repository, or are you using the standard Arch repositories?  If it's the
latter, it sounds like you'd end up with an Arch system that happened to be
bootstrapped using LFS...

Paul


I started by using arch PKGBUILDS but that did not give me what I needed 
or wanted, so


I host my own repo on my own network.
I build my own packages, creating my own PKGBUILDS  using nothing from 
arch but based on LFS.
I will not end up with an arch system boot strapped by LFS but a scratch 
built system base on my needs.
It is very different from the file system directory structure up with 
sysvinit init system.


The process that I used was to take LFS-6.8 and create a build system 
(scripts) that follow the book but using the pacman package manager.
I will update this to LFS-7.2 after it becomes available in Sept. After 
words I will use BLFS to create a desktop system and serves packages.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

2012-08-14 Thread gt

On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 02:05:10PM -0600, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:
 On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 02:37:54PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
  I suspect that BSD for artist that draw can be used, but for audio not.
  Am I mistaken?
 
 I'm not sure I understand the question.
 
 There's a lot of audio software in FreeBSD.  Whether any of it suits your 
 purposes, I can not say.
 
 http://www.freebsd.org/ports/
 
 Arch certainly has great stuff in this department.  The AUR's full of decent 
 packages.  But I'm not really an artist interested in audio so I can't 
 say how any of it compares.

Offtopic: Your system clock seems to be way off.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 03:28:17PM +0200, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
 On 08/09/12 22:00, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:
  I think what he was saying wasn't that systemd is hard but switching is 
  hard irrespectively of what you're switching to.  
 Because the devs made systemd being able to use rc.conf?

I'm just trying to clarify his actual argument so you can address
that rather than slaying the straw man.

You have to admit that the dev work does forebode the potential to
make it the default in the distro.  Doesn't make it certain but I
don't think the certainty is what scares people.

 It takes less then a day to use systemd, but I am not forcing you to use it.

No, you'll never force me to do anything.  As I said in this thread
already, I'm not using arch on my workhorse.  I'm not worried about
it like some people are.  I'm just trying to elevate the level of 
discourse here.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tuesday 14 Aug 2012 14:59:43 Ralf Mardorf wrote:
 On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 13:45 +0100, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
  and easier for most users to maintain
 
 USERS? I'm a stupid user. I guess you're talking about experts. For
 USERS it's hard to follow changes every half year. We stupid users
 simply want to use the computer. We are willing to learn, but we won't
 start from the beginning, every half year.

Cool, so once you're set up with systemd, you should find it easier to work 
with.  As for change, I'm afraid that's inevitable in ArchLinux, because it's 
intended to be a cutting-edge distro.  If you don't like the change, you 
really need to consider switching to something less hands-on.  I hear that 
OpenSUSE Tumbleweed is a viable rolling-release option.  And I think Mint 
Debian Edition is also rolling-release?

Paul

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 15:32 +0200, Thomas Bächler wrote:
 So, you are annoying the whole mailing list

You are speaking for the WHOLE mailing list? I read this from others a
thousand times before. YOU AREN'T SPEAKING AT LEAST FOR ME!

Call me a troll, I'm anyway member of this list and YOU DON'T SPEAK FOR
ME!

Thank you,
Ralf

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 07:20:29PM +0530, gt wrote:
 Offtopic: Your system clock seems to be way off.

So it is!  Thanks for the heads up.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Baho Utot baho-u...@columbus.rr.com wrote:
 On 08/09/2012 03:13 PM, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:

 On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 08:58:41AM -0400, Baho Utot wrote:

 Yes looks like I will need to migrate to BSD

 I've already begun using FreeBSD.  Only real complaint I have is that my
 notmuch database isn't backwards compatible with the one they have in ports.
 Other than that, it's been a smooth transition.

 I was always most attracted to arch by its proximity to the BSD's.  With
 all this talk of systemd, I felt it was time to bring that proximity to
 fruition.

 Arch remains on my laptop for the time being.  I have fond memories of
 Arch that I hope do not dwindle.


 I think Arch was good back in the day.

 Now not so good.

 I have stopped using arch except for one server that does mail and DNS. It
 is presently being moved to my own linux distro based on LFS and using
 pacman for the package manager.

Does that means you'll stop trolling this mailing list? I, for one,
thank you for that!

-- 
A: Because it obfuscates the reading.
Q: Why is top posting so bad?
For more information, please read: http://idallen.com/topposting.html

---
Denis A. Altoe Falqueto
Linux user #524555
---

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd


On 08/14/2012 09:32 AM, Thomas Bächler wrote:

Am 14.08.2012 15:08, schrieb Baho Utot:

Wow, this sounds so much like a conspiracy theory.  The fact is that the
people who write the code inevitably dictate which software is
maintained,
based on their interests and convictions, and they're pretty much
unanimous
that systemd is a better solution to the problem of booting and
maintaining
daemons than the solution we currently have.

So yeah, I guess that's been the game plan all along: make booting and
daemon
control more consistent, faster, and easier for most users to maintain.

Paul

I don't understand your point

What is so wrong with the booting using sysvinit?

I really don't need what systemd offers and sysvinit does everything I
need and has not failed me.

And you don't want systemd because you are sure it won't do what
sysvinit can, even though you didn't try it.


Dude I have 5 fedora systems from 15 to 17 and they use the full 
systemd, Hence my dis-stain for it.






So is your point that I need to move to systemd because the developers
tell me I must?

You need to move because the rest of the Linux ecosystem will require
systemd at some point, just like it now requires udev. If you don't like
it, then stop annoying us and start maintaining code that makes sure
YOUR way will keep working.

It's like that: Whoever contributes code makes the decisions.


Why I am creating my own distro from scratch





As for systemd being better solution for the problem of booting the
beauty is in the eye of the beholder and I just don't see it, so why
take away sysvint?

I could repeat what I said above.


You can use systemd and I should be able to use what works for me and
not be forced down the systemd path.

So, you are annoying the whole mailing list because you don't like that
you _might_ be forced to switch to a superior booting scheme which is
unlikely to affect you negatively in any way.


It has not been established that systemd is superior. You take facts not 
in evidence



Arch's policy on systemd vs. initscripts has not even been discussed
among Arch developers yet, and nothing has been decided. Yet, you guys
are acting like someone's going to eat your childrn.

I can't stand this anymore. I want to just add replaces=('initscripts')
to the systemd package just to make this fucking discussion stop. If
you don't have anything _technical_ to discuss, and don't have any
problem that you want help solving, then move this bullshit somewhere I
don't have to see it.

I wonder if there is a way to lock a thread in mailman.



Go ahead, take your bad attitude and change it.

BTW learn how to use filters in your email program.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

2012-08-14 Thread Calvin Morrison

On 14 August 2012 09:52, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto
denisfalqu...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Baho Utot baho-u...@columbus.rr.com wrote:
 On 08/09/2012 03:13 PM, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:

 On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 08:58:41AM -0400, Baho Utot wrote:

 Yes looks like I will need to migrate to BSD

 I've already begun using FreeBSD.  Only real complaint I have is that my
 notmuch database isn't backwards compatible with the one they have in ports.
 Other than that, it's been a smooth transition.

 I was always most attracted to arch by its proximity to the BSD's.  With
 all this talk of systemd, I felt it was time to bring that proximity to
 fruition.

 Arch remains on my laptop for the time being.  I have fond memories of
 Arch that I hope do not dwindle.


 I think Arch was good back in the day.

 Now not so good.

 I have stopped using arch except for one server that does mail and DNS. It
 is presently being moved to my own linux distro based on LFS and using
 pacman for the package manager.

 Does that means you'll stop trolling this mailing list? I, for one,
 thank you for that!

 --
 A: Because it obfuscates the reading.
 Q: Why is top posting so bad?
 For more information, please read: http://idallen.com/topposting.html

 ---
 Denis A. Altoe Falqueto
 Linux user #524555
 ---

When did offering an opposing opinion to what ever is popular become
tolling? what is this? /r/politics?

I frankly have seen arguments both ways for systemd and initscripts,
and the fact that many users do not want to switch is enough for me to
say ok then let's not switch.

the GNU/Linux community seems to have this jump ship mentality which
is really annoying.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 14:47 +0100, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
 On Tuesday 14 Aug 2012 09:08:36 Baho Utot wrote:
  I don't understand your point
  
  What is so wrong with the booting using sysvinit?
  
  I really don't need what systemd offers and sysvinit does everything I
  need and has not failed me.
 
 There's nothing inherently wrong with it, just like there was nothing 
 inherently wrong with pen and paper before computers came along.  Many people 
 would argue that pen and paper does everything they need, but that doesn't 
 change the fact that most people find computers more flexible.  Those wanting 
 to 
 stick to pen and paper find themselves increasingly frustrated that they 
 can't 
 get by without a computer.  It's not that they're not *entitled* to their 
 opinion, it's just that everyone else has moved on.  It's not a conspiracy; 
 things simply change.  Maybe you don't see the advantage, but other people do.
 
  So is your point that I need to move to systemd because the developers
  tell me I must?
 
 My point is that you need to move to systemd because if you don't, you'll be 
 using a system that noone is willing to maintain.
 
  As for systemd being better solution for the problem of booting the
  beauty is in the eye of the beholder and I just don't see it, so why
  take away sysvint?
 
 Sysvinit will not be taken away.  However, as is the way of software, if 
 sysvinit is not actively maintained, it will simply stop working in a matter 
 of years.
 
  You can use systemd and I should be able to use what works for me and
  not be forced down the systemd path.
 
 Unwanted change is not nice.  In fact, I haven't switched to systemd yet 
 because I'm worried about the switch (even though I've heard it's pretty 
 easy), and sysvinit works OK for me right now.  However, I'm also interested 
 in discovering what all this new stuff is that everyone promises systemd can 
 deliver, so I'm happy with the idea that I'll switch at some point.
 
  Isn't this what open source software freedom is all about or did I miss
  somethingI have use linux from the redhat 5.2 (no I am not talking
  the enterprise version) days.
 
 No, open source software is not about giving you whatever software you want.  
 It's about producing whatever software you want, and letting anyone use it.  
 If you're willing to maintain Sysvinit, you're absolutely free to do that.  
 It 
 may well be that someone *will* be willing to do that when the time comes.  
 In 
 the meantime, I'm afraid your only choice is to use the software that is 
 maintained.
 
 Paul

Not what I want to hear, but a good, objective statement!

Respect,
Ralf

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

2012-08-14 Thread Jelle van der Waa

On 08/14/12 15:51, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
 On Tuesday 14 Aug 2012 14:59:43 Ralf Mardorf wrote:
 On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 13:45 +0100, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
 and easier for most users to maintain

 USERS? I'm a stupid user. I guess you're talking about experts. For
 USERS it's hard to follow changes every half year. We stupid users
 simply want to use the computer. We are willing to learn, but we won't
 start from the beginning, every half year.
 
 Cool, so once you're set up with systemd, you should find it easier to work 
 with.  As for change, I'm afraid that's inevitable in ArchLinux, because it's 
 intended to be a cutting-edge distro.  If you don't like the change, you 
 really need to consider switching to something less hands-on.  I hear that 
 OpenSUSE Tumbleweed is a viable rolling-release option.  And I think Mint 
 Debian Edition is also rolling-release?
 
 Paul
 
SuSe has systemd plans too ;)

-- 
Jelle van der Waa



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd


On 08/09/2012 04:23 PM, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:

[putolin]

As explained in this and other threads, it may not be a decision we, 
in the Arch world, get to make. Too much of upstream may actually be 
dictated by what a comercially-backed distro does. 


That is why I just may end up using BSD.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd


On 08/14/2012 09:58 AM, Calvin Morrison wrote:

[putolin]

When did offering an opposing opinion to what ever is popular become 
tolling? what is this? /r/politics? I frankly have seen arguments both 
ways for systemd and initscripts, and the fact that many users do not 
want to switch is enough for me to say ok then let's not switch. the 
GNU/Linux community seems to have this jump ship mentality which is 
really annoying. 


Thank you

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 14:51 +0100, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
 On Tuesday 14 Aug 2012 14:59:43 Ralf Mardorf wrote:
  On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 13:45 +0100, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
   and easier for most users to maintain
  
  USERS? I'm a stupid user. I guess you're talking about experts. For
  USERS it's hard to follow changes every half year. We stupid users
  simply want to use the computer. We are willing to learn, but we won't
  start from the beginning, every half year.
 
 Cool, so once you're set up with systemd, you should find it easier to work 
 with.  As for change, I'm afraid that's inevitable in ArchLinux, because it's 
 intended to be a cutting-edge distro.  If you don't like the change, you 
 really need to consider switching to something less hands-on.  I hear that 
 OpenSUSE Tumbleweed is a viable rolling-release option.  And I think Mint 
 Debian Edition is also rolling-release?
 
 Paul

I'm from Germany, so I started with Suse and I still have an outdated
Suse installed. Suse doesn't fit to my needs. I tested Mint and Mint
doesn't fit to my needs. Arch did and still does fit to my needs. I just
fear that soon Arch won't fit to my needs. I'm not objective, I just
care about my needs. This is selfish, I'm aware of this. However, why
shouldn't I take care of my needs? I also work on a voluntary basis. I
fight for the rights of others, but I also fight for satisfying my
needs. That's all.

Regards,
Ralf

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

2012-08-14 Thread Sander Jansen

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Baho Utot baho-u...@columbus.rr.com wrote:
 On 08/09/2012 04:23 PM, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:

 [putolin]


 As explained in this and other threads, it may not be a decision we, in
 the Arch world, get to make. Too much of upstream may actually be dictated
 by what a comercially-backed distro does.


 That is why I just may end up using BSD.

Good luck with that! I'm sure they have a openbsd-general mailinglist
where you continue your discussion.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Calvin Morrison
mutanttur...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 14 August 2012 09:52, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto
 denisfalqu...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Baho Utot baho-u...@columbus.rr.com 
 wrote:
 On 08/09/2012 03:13 PM, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:

 On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 08:58:41AM -0400, Baho Utot wrote:

 Yes looks like I will need to migrate to BSD

 I've already begun using FreeBSD.  Only real complaint I have is that my
 notmuch database isn't backwards compatible with the one they have in 
 ports.
 Other than that, it's been a smooth transition.

 I was always most attracted to arch by its proximity to the BSD's.  With
 all this talk of systemd, I felt it was time to bring that proximity to
 fruition.

 Arch remains on my laptop for the time being.  I have fond memories of
 Arch that I hope do not dwindle.


 I think Arch was good back in the day.

 Now not so good.

 I have stopped using arch except for one server that does mail and DNS. It
 is presently being moved to my own linux distro based on LFS and using
 pacman for the package manager.

 Does that means you'll stop trolling this mailing list? I, for one,
 thank you for that!

 --
 A: Because it obfuscates the reading.
 Q: Why is top posting so bad?
 For more information, please read: http://idallen.com/topposting.html

 ---
 Denis A. Altoe Falqueto
 Linux user #524555
 ---

 When did offering an opposing opinion to what ever is popular become
 tolling? what is this? /r/politics?

 I frankly have seen arguments both ways for systemd and initscripts,
 and the fact that many users do not want to switch is enough for me to
 say ok then let's not switch.

 the GNU/Linux community seems to have this jump ship mentality which
 is really annoying.

There are lots of levels of discussions. I don't remember him giving
one only usefull and high level post. Just pure bashing and spitting
his opinion, that is important for him, sure, but not necessarily for
others. And I even thanked him for going in the direction he really
wants. If all nay sayers did that, we could be a very healthier list.

-- 
A: Because it obfuscates the reading.
Q: Why is top posting so bad?
For more information, please read: http://idallen.com/topposting.html

---
Denis A. Altoe Falqueto
Linux user #524555
---

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

2012-08-14 Thread phani

On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 19:33:41 +0530, Jelle van der Waa je...@vdwaa.nl  
wrote:



SuSe has systemd plans too


in openSUSE's upcoming version, 12.2, systemd is default. for the moment  
though both init systems are being maintained. this lead to very similar  
discussions on the mailing lists over there, with exactly the same  
opinions i find here.


while this is definitely tiring after a while, i find a mail client that  
allows to ignore thread very helpful.


--
phani.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 09:55 -0400, Baho Utot wrote:
 BTW learn how to use filters in your email program.

I'm not using Thunderbird anymore as he does, but I remember it was easy
to do. However, I hope he won't ban anybody. His help is useful.
Regarding to this discussion I don't like his opinion.

Regards,
Ralf

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 11:12 -0300, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto wrote:
 On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Calvin Morrison
 mutanttur...@gmail.com wrote:
  On 14 August 2012 09:52, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto
  denisfalqu...@gmail.com wrote:
  On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Baho Utot baho-u...@columbus.rr.com 
  wrote:
  On 08/09/2012 03:13 PM, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:
 
  On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 08:58:41AM -0400, Baho Utot wrote:
 
  Yes looks like I will need to migrate to BSD
 
  I've already begun using FreeBSD.  Only real complaint I have is that my
  notmuch database isn't backwards compatible with the one they have in 
  ports.
  Other than that, it's been a smooth transition.
 
  I was always most attracted to arch by its proximity to the BSD's.  With
  all this talk of systemd, I felt it was time to bring that proximity to
  fruition.
 
  Arch remains on my laptop for the time being.  I have fond memories of
  Arch that I hope do not dwindle.
 
 
  I think Arch was good back in the day.
 
  Now not so good.
 
  I have stopped using arch except for one server that does mail and DNS. It
  is presently being moved to my own linux distro based on LFS and using
  pacman for the package manager.
 
  Does that means you'll stop trolling this mailing list? I, for one,
  thank you for that!
 
  --
  A: Because it obfuscates the reading.
  Q: Why is top posting so bad?
  For more information, please read: http://idallen.com/topposting.html
 
  ---
  Denis A. Altoe Falqueto
  Linux user #524555
  ---
 
  When did offering an opposing opinion to what ever is popular become
  tolling? what is this? /r/politics?
 
  I frankly have seen arguments both ways for systemd and initscripts,
  and the fact that many users do not want to switch is enough for me to
  say ok then let's not switch.
 
  the GNU/Linux community seems to have this jump ship mentality which
  is really annoying.
 
 There are lots of levels of discussions. I don't remember him giving
 one only usefull and high level post. Just pure bashing and spitting
 his opinion, that is important for him, sure, but not necessarily for
 others. And I even thanked him for going in the direction he really
 wants. If all nay sayers did that, we could be a very healthier list.

That's the first really unsocial, aka flame, I read on this list :(.
Note, even a personality disorder, a troll or what ever in your mind is
bad, is part of the human community. healthier list to me sounds like
eugenics and similar stupid and evil nonsense.

Keep the list pure practice eugenics :(?!

I hope I misunderstood your words so that my statement is overdone.

Regards,
Ralf

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Jelle van der Waa je...@vdwaa.nl wrote:

 On 08/09/12 22:00, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:
  I think what he was saying wasn't that systemd is hard but switching is
 hard irrespectively of what you're switching to.
 Because the devs made systemd being able to use rc.conf?

 It takes less then a day to use systemd, but I am not forcing you to use
 it.

 --
 Jelle van der Waa

 Yeah, I found systemd very easy to learn. The wiki page is great, and
after switching to it I prefer it because I just find it a lot easier to
deal with than sysvinit IMO. For example I find systemd's .service files so
much cleaner and easier to understand than initscripts, they are also
portable and can be included in upstream packages.

This Oh my god systemd is hard and I'm being forced to use it! FUD I keep
seeing is getting pretty ridiculous... Even if arch does someday switch to
systemd, I'm sure initscripts will be supported for quite some time, giving
plenty of time to learn/transition (again really not that hard) in the
event that that ever happened.

Arch has always been a bleeding edge constantly changing distro, if you
want everything to stay the same forever, use debian. No matter what
happens with this whole sysvinit vs systemd kerfuffle, you will never be
forced to use systemd in arch, just like you've never been forced to use
sysvinit...

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 16:23 +0200, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
 On 08/14/12 16:06, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
  On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 14:51 +0100, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
  On Tuesday 14 Aug 2012 14:59:43 Ralf Mardorf wrote:
  On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 13:45 +0100, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
  and easier for most users to maintain
 
  USERS? I'm a stupid user. I guess you're talking about experts. For
  USERS it's hard to follow changes every half year. We stupid users
  simply want to use the computer. We are willing to learn, but we won't
  start from the beginning, every half year.
 
  Cool, so once you're set up with systemd, you should find it easier to 
  work 
  with.  As for change, I'm afraid that's inevitable in ArchLinux, because 
  it's 
  intended to be a cutting-edge distro.  If you don't like the change, you 
  really need to consider switching to something less hands-on.  I hear that 
  OpenSUSE Tumbleweed is a viable rolling-release option.  And I think Mint 
  Debian Edition is also rolling-release?
 
  Paul
  
  I'm from Germany, so I started with Suse and I still have an outdated
  Suse installed. Suse doesn't fit to my needs. I tested Mint and Mint
  doesn't fit to my needs. Arch did and still does fit to my needs. I just
  fear that soon Arch won't fit to my needs. I'm not objective, I just
  care about my needs. This is selfish, I'm aware of this. However, why
  shouldn't I take care of my needs? I also work on a voluntary basis. I
  fight for the rights of others, but I also fight for satisfying my
  needs. That's all.
  
  Regards,
  Ralf
  
  
 Then maintain/improve the current initscripts...

I don't have the ability to do this. I don't have time to learn this,
since I work on a voluntary basis in other areas. And who knows, even if
I would have the time to learn, perhaps I'm not able to do it.

So again, is self-responsibility = spend all your live time with
setting up Linux only? Isn't the philosophy of a community that people
have different abilities and that they take care of each other?

Regards,
Ralf

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd


On 08/14/2012 10:32 AM, Brandon Watkins wrote:

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Jelle van der Waa je...@vdwaa.nl wrote:


On 08/09/12 22:00, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:

I think what he was saying wasn't that systemd is hard but switching is

hard irrespectively of what you're switching to.
Because the devs made systemd being able to use rc.conf?

It takes less then a day to use systemd, but I am not forcing you to use
it.

--
Jelle van der Waa

Yeah, I found systemd very easy to learn. The wiki page is great, and

after switching to it I prefer it because I just find it a lot easier to
deal with than sysvinit IMO. For example I find systemd's .service files so
much cleaner and easier to understand than initscripts, they are also
portable and can be included in upstream packages.

This Oh my god systemd is hard and I'm being forced to use it! FUD I keep
seeing is getting pretty ridiculous... Even if arch does someday switch to
systemd, I'm sure initscripts will be supported for quite some time, giving
plenty of time to learn/transition (again really not that hard) in the
event that that ever happened.

Arch has always been a bleeding edge constantly changing distro, if you
want everything to stay the same forever, use debian. No matter what
happens with this whole sysvinit vs systemd kerfuffle, you will never be
forced to use systemd in arch, just like you've never been forced to use
sysvinit...


I don't think you fully understand the issue.

If udev was still a stand alone package and not part of systemd as it 
is now
Then systemd would be an alternative init system and all the other init 
systems would not be impacted and one could use any of the system init 
methods he chooses.  If you would want systemd becames it works for you 
great...knock yourself out...but on the other hand when this thing 
becomes fully matured then systemd will be the only one that works well 
with udev and everyone else be damned.


Lennart Poettering by his own submission stated that he wanted udev as 
part of systemd and that he doesn't care about any other init system 
that would use udev.  As with Lennart it seems as it's my way or the 
highway...which indeed is the problem.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

2012-08-14 Thread Geoff

On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 15:23:28 +0200
Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:
snip

ImightBeMistakenSinceIonlyTestedPascalWithTheC64AndDecidedToUseAssemblerInstead

OT, but if the above is true, was that Oxford Pascal, and did you then switch
to the MIKRO Assembler cartridge (as I did) ? Well to be accurate I switched
to it after first using an assembler program written in BASIC, typed in
from a book.

Geoff

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 10:55 -0400, Baho Utot wrote:
 On 08/14/2012 10:32 AM, Brandon Watkins wrote:
  On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Jelle van der Waa je...@vdwaa.nl wrote:
 
  On 08/09/12 22:00, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:
  I think what he was saying wasn't that systemd is hard but switching is
  hard irrespectively of what you're switching to.
  Because the devs made systemd being able to use rc.conf?
 
  It takes less then a day to use systemd, but I am not forcing you to use
  it.
 
  --
  Jelle van der Waa
 
  Yeah, I found systemd very easy to learn. The wiki page is great, and
  after switching to it I prefer it because I just find it a lot easier to
  deal with than sysvinit IMO. For example I find systemd's .service files so
  much cleaner and easier to understand than initscripts, they are also
  portable and can be included in upstream packages.
 
  This Oh my god systemd is hard and I'm being forced to use it! FUD I keep
  seeing is getting pretty ridiculous... Even if arch does someday switch to
  systemd, I'm sure initscripts will be supported for quite some time, giving
  plenty of time to learn/transition (again really not that hard) in the
  event that that ever happened.
 
  Arch has always been a bleeding edge constantly changing distro, if you
  want everything to stay the same forever, use debian. No matter what
  happens with this whole sysvinit vs systemd kerfuffle, you will never be
  forced to use systemd in arch, just like you've never been forced to use
  sysvinit...
 
 I don't think you fully understand the issue.
 
 If udev was still a stand alone package and not part of systemd as it 
 is now
 Then systemd would be an alternative init system and all the other init 
 systems would not be impacted and one could use any of the system init 
 methods he chooses.  If you would want systemd becames it works for you 
 great...knock yourself out...but on the other hand when this thing 
 becomes fully matured then systemd will be the only one that works well 
 with udev and everyone else be damned.
 
 Lennart Poettering by his own submission stated that he wanted udev as 
 part of systemd and that he doesn't care about any other init system 
 that would use udev.  As with Lennart it seems as it's my way or the 
 highway...which indeed is the problem.

Mailman archives! IIRC Heiko mentioned that there are more disputes
about Lennart Poettering and his software on ALL mailing lists, than
about anything else.

Why is it like that?

There are many things we are in disagreement, but only Lennart's
software at the moment cause nasty discussions.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

2012-08-14 Thread Fons Adriaensen

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:55:02AM -0400, Baho Utot wrote:

 after switching to it I prefer it because I just find it a lot easier to
 deal with than sysvinit IMO. For example I find systemd's .service files so
 much cleaner and easier to understand than initscripts, they are also
 portable and can be included in upstream packages.
 
 This Oh my god systemd is hard and I'm being forced to use it! FUD I keep
 seeing is getting pretty ridiculous... Even if arch does someday switch to
 systemd, I'm sure initscripts will be supported for quite some time, giving
 plenty of time to learn/transition (again really not that hard) in the
 event that that ever happened.
 
 Arch has always been a bleeding edge constantly changing distro, if you
 want everything to stay the same forever, use debian. No matter what
 happens with this whole sysvinit vs systemd kerfuffle, you will never be
 forced to use systemd in arch, just like you've never been forced to use
 sysvinit...
 
 I don't think you fully understand the issue.
 
 If udev was still a stand alone package and not part of systemd as
 it is now
 Then systemd would be an alternative init system and all the other
 init systems would not be impacted and one could use any of the
 system init methods he chooses.  If you would want systemd becames
 it works for you great...knock yourself out...but on the other hand
 when this thing becomes fully matured then systemd will be the only
 one that works well with udev and everyone else be damned.
 
 Lennart Poettering by his own submission stated that he wanted udev
 as part of systemd and that he doesn't care about any other init
 system that would use udev.  As with Lennart it seems as it's my way
 or the highway...which indeed is the problem.
 
I agree. It's not systemd being 'hard' that scares most people
who object to it - that is a misrepresantatio. In fact I'm pretty
sure systemd is easier to use and configure than initscripts.

BTW has anyone looked at upstart ? The current AUR package is 
out of date (and I'm looking at some deadlines so this is not
the time for experiments), but it has excellent documentation
http://upstart.ubuntu.com/cookbook/, much better than anything
I've seem for systemd so far, and after spending some time
reading the above reference I must say I like it. At least 
it doesn't have that ugly and infantile syntax and it looks
like was designed by programmers instead of by a kid.

Ciao,


-- 
FA

A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 12:05 PM, Ralf Mardorf
ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:
 On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 10:55 -0400, Baho Utot wrote:
 On 08/14/2012 10:32 AM, Brandon Watkins wrote:
  On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Jelle van der Waa je...@vdwaa.nl wrote:
 
  On 08/09/12 22:00, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:
  I think what he was saying wasn't that systemd is hard but switching is
  hard irrespectively of what you're switching to.
  Because the devs made systemd being able to use rc.conf?
 
  It takes less then a day to use systemd, but I am not forcing you to use
  it.
 
  --
  Jelle van der Waa
 
  Yeah, I found systemd very easy to learn. The wiki page is great, and
  after switching to it I prefer it because I just find it a lot easier to
  deal with than sysvinit IMO. For example I find systemd's .service files so
  much cleaner and easier to understand than initscripts, they are also
  portable and can be included in upstream packages.
 
  This Oh my god systemd is hard and I'm being forced to use it! FUD I keep
  seeing is getting pretty ridiculous... Even if arch does someday switch to
  systemd, I'm sure initscripts will be supported for quite some time, giving
  plenty of time to learn/transition (again really not that hard) in the
  event that that ever happened.
 
  Arch has always been a bleeding edge constantly changing distro, if you
  want everything to stay the same forever, use debian. No matter what
  happens with this whole sysvinit vs systemd kerfuffle, you will never be
  forced to use systemd in arch, just like you've never been forced to use
  sysvinit...

 I don't think you fully understand the issue.

 If udev was still a stand alone package and not part of systemd as it
 is now
 Then systemd would be an alternative init system and all the other init
 systems would not be impacted and one could use any of the system init
 methods he chooses.  If you would want systemd becames it works for you
 great...knock yourself out...but on the other hand when this thing
 becomes fully matured then systemd will be the only one that works well
 with udev and everyone else be damned.

 Lennart Poettering by his own submission stated that he wanted udev as
 part of systemd and that he doesn't care about any other init system
 that would use udev.  As with Lennart it seems as it's my way or the
 highway...which indeed is the problem.

 Mailman archives! IIRC Heiko mentioned that there are more disputes
 about Lennart Poettering and his software on ALL mailing lists, than
 about anything else.

 Why is it like that?

 There are many things we are in disagreement, but only Lennart's
 software at the moment cause nasty discussions.

The answer is very simple: he is doing something. Others are just
perpetuating things just for the sake of it. Maybe everything is not
the best solution always, but at least he is trying. Better than just
talking.

-- 
A: Because it obfuscates the reading.
Q: Why is top posting so bad?
For more information, please read: http://idallen.com/topposting.html

---
Denis A. Altoe Falqueto
Linux user #524555
---

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

2012-08-14 Thread Calvin Morrison

On 14 August 2012 11:07, Fons Adriaensen f...@linuxaudio.org wrote:
 On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:55:02AM -0400, Baho Utot wrote:

 after switching to it I prefer it because I just find it a lot easier to
 deal with than sysvinit IMO. For example I find systemd's .service files so
 much cleaner and easier to understand than initscripts, they are also
 portable and can be included in upstream packages.
 
 This Oh my god systemd is hard and I'm being forced to use it! FUD I keep
 seeing is getting pretty ridiculous... Even if arch does someday switch to
 systemd, I'm sure initscripts will be supported for quite some time, giving
 plenty of time to learn/transition (again really not that hard) in the
 event that that ever happened.
 
 Arch has always been a bleeding edge constantly changing distro, if you
 want everything to stay the same forever, use debian. No matter what
 happens with this whole sysvinit vs systemd kerfuffle, you will never be
 forced to use systemd in arch, just like you've never been forced to use
 sysvinit...

 I don't think you fully understand the issue.

 If udev was still a stand alone package and not part of systemd as
 it is now
 Then systemd would be an alternative init system and all the other
 init systems would not be impacted and one could use any of the
 system init methods he chooses.  If you would want systemd becames
 it works for you great...knock yourself out...but on the other hand
 when this thing becomes fully matured then systemd will be the only
 one that works well with udev and everyone else be damned.

 Lennart Poettering by his own submission stated that he wanted udev
 as part of systemd and that he doesn't care about any other init
 system that would use udev.  As with Lennart it seems as it's my way
 or the highway...which indeed is the problem.

 I agree. It's not systemd being 'hard' that scares most people
 who object to it - that is a misrepresantatio. In fact I'm pretty
 sure systemd is easier to use and configure than initscripts.

 BTW has anyone looked at upstart ? The current AUR package is
 out of date (and I'm looking at some deadlines so this is not
 the time for experiments), but it has excellent documentation
 http://upstart.ubuntu.com/cookbook/, much better than anything
 I've seem for systemd so far, and after spending some time
 reading the above reference I must say I like it. At least
 it doesn't have that ugly and infantile syntax and it looks
 like was designed by programmers instead of by a kid.


That is because it was. It was designed and planned before writing, it
is backwards compatible, it has very good documentation and unit
testing. I approve of upstart as a project even though I do not use
it.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 16:03 +0100, Geoff wrote:
 On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 15:23:28 +0200
 Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:
 snip
 
 ImightBeMistakenSinceIonlyTestedPascalWithTheC64AndDecidedToUseAssemblerInstead
 
 OT, but if the above is true, was that Oxford Pascal, and did you then switch
 to the MIKRO Assembler cartridge (as I did) ? Well to be accurate I switched
 to it after first using an assembler program written in BASIC, typed in
 from a book.
 
 Geoff

The C64 Pascal was from MarktTechnik 1986 ISBN 3-89090-222-7
*chuckle* my flat is a museum.

Regarding to 65xx, e.g. 6502, 6510 Assembler I started with directly
programming (sorry my English is broken). There was no chance to insert
a command, later I used Assembler software that could be used like an
editor. It was possible to insert commands, to handle modules
comfortably (code that used branches instead of jumps and that could be
placed at any point of the RAM).

I never programmed by using op-code directly, excepted of some skip
tricks, programs that did different things when jumping to the even or
odd address. At that time (pre mov commands, still load and store) it
was possible to jump at any address (pardon, as you know ;).

I don't know the name MIKRO Assembler cartridge. Perhaps I used it to,
perhaps not.

Regards,
Ralf

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

2012-08-14 Thread Mateusz Loskot

On 14 August 2012 16:05, Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:
 On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 10:55 -0400, Baho Utot wrote:

 Lennart Poettering by his own submission stated that he wanted udev as
 part of systemd and that he doesn't care about any other init system
 that would use udev.  As with Lennart it seems as it's my way or the
 highway...which indeed is the problem.

 Mailman archives! IIRC Heiko mentioned that there are more disputes
 about Lennart Poettering and his software on ALL mailing lists, than
 about anything else.

 Why is it like that?

Because the whole subject has been accumulating emotions for months.
Check this year-old review by  Juliusz Chroboczek [1] followed
by Lennart's response [2] and bumped and summarised by (e.g. [3])

[1] http://lwn.net/Articles/453004/
[2] http://lwn.net/Articles/453016/
[3] http://lwn.net/Articles/452865/

Best regards,
-- 
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

2012-08-14 Thread Kevin Chadwick

We should all be getting tired of this now. Please read the multiple
threads before posting things that have already been posted. Actually
don't as we will never hear from you again ;-)

Who said we are going to be forced to use systemd again. I believe the
systemd design spec also said he hopes to remove all scripts, that
hasn't and won't happen. There will always be alternatives, if arch is
one we will find out. This trolling of forcing users has brought other
wrong statements. Pulse and Gnome on the other hand has forced a problem
on ralf and I hope the highly regarded kernel developer in charge of
udev will help sort out systemd to linus way of thinking (break nothing
unless you must and then IF it's optional that's ok) and not the
other way around.

I've found udev is not a requirement for linux at all, you don't even
need devtmpfs. In fact devtree is gaining support for embedded devices.

It's not about sysVinit vs systemd. I'm not a fan of sysvinit either
but I don't mind it. It's about pid 1 being an init binary that does
just one job well and assumes nothing allowing limitless customisation
and applying to all systems including toasters and even ipv6 and cgroup
(necessary evils according to linus) free devices and init should let
you run systemd without problem?

I still don't know why systemd is pid 1. I know it wants to use kmod
early on to determine ordering for later but I don't see that as a
reason to be pid 1. I guess to reduce the chances of something running
that systemd has no idea about or systemd being started too late.

Ralf, OpenBSD has a real nice sndio daemon with parts in kernel for
great latency and certainly worth looking at however it does not support
24bit and the devs said they have no interest in spending the time on
adding that and I don't fancy your chances in getting a sound card with
a low noise dac working but could be very wrong as I've only had partial
functionality on Linux before from an off the shelf product without
paying a huge price.

There will be a learning curve to move to BSD when upgrading packages
though dependencies won't be as much of a problem on OpenBSD and I know
you said you have a long to do list so I would wait and see and wouldn't
base any decision on systemd but would look at sndio in any case.

http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=sndioapropos=0sektion=0manpath=OpenBSD+Currentarch=i386format=html
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-miscm=134376444701682w=2

I can't help with freeBSD but it may well be useful as I refuse to waste
time and energy on building just for local user systems and wasn't too
impressed with PCBSD.

Please CC me in any future audio discussions.

Baho you may like how easy this init system is to follow.

http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=initapropos=0sektion=0manpath=OpenBSD+Currentarch=i386format=html

--
___

'Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work
together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a
universal interface'

(Doug McIlroy)
___

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Baho Utot baho-u...@columbus.rr.comwrote:

 On 08/14/2012 10:32 AM, Brandon Watkins wrote:

 On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Jelle van der Waa je...@vdwaa.nl
 wrote:

  On 08/09/12 22:00, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:

 I think what he was saying wasn't that systemd is hard but switching is

 hard irrespectively of what you're switching to.
 Because the devs made systemd being able to use rc.conf?

 It takes less then a day to use systemd, but I am not forcing you to use
 it.

 --
 Jelle van der Waa

 Yeah, I found systemd very easy to learn. The wiki page is great, and

 after switching to it I prefer it because I just find it a lot easier to
 deal with than sysvinit IMO. For example I find systemd's .service files
 so
 much cleaner and easier to understand than initscripts, they are also
 portable and can be included in upstream packages.

 This Oh my god systemd is hard and I'm being forced to use it! FUD I
 keep
 seeing is getting pretty ridiculous... Even if arch does someday switch to
 systemd, I'm sure initscripts will be supported for quite some time,
 giving
 plenty of time to learn/transition (again really not that hard) in the
 event that that ever happened.

 Arch has always been a bleeding edge constantly changing distro, if you
 want everything to stay the same forever, use debian. No matter what
 happens with this whole sysvinit vs systemd kerfuffle, you will never be
 forced to use systemd in arch, just like you've never been forced to use
 sysvinit...


 I don't think you fully understand the issue.

 If udev was still a stand alone package and not part of systemd as it is
 now
 Then systemd would be an alternative init system and all the other init
 systems would not be impacted and one could use any of the system init
 methods he chooses.  If you would want systemd becames it works for you
 great...knock yourself out...but on the other hand when this thing becomes
 fully matured then systemd will be the only one that works well with udev
 and everyone else be damned.

 Lennart Poettering by his own submission stated that he wanted udev as
 part of systemd and that he doesn't care about any other init system that
 would use udev.  As with Lennart it seems as it's my way or the
 highway...which indeed is the problem.


 Poettering didn't kidnap the udev developers and force them to merge with
systemd. And yes I am aware of his comments regarding udev, I saw a comment
elsewhere that I think explains what he meant pretty well:

What he's saying is non-systemd systems are dead in our eyes because no
one is maintaining them; we will maintain udev without systemd as promised,
but don't ask us to spend our time making it pretty; if you want that pay
someone to do that for you.

I don't see what's unclear here.


Lets take a hypothetical situation: If udev someday only works well with
systemd (which is wild speculation...) then if there is enough interest, an
alternative would appear for people who don't use systemd. If there isn't
enough interest in other init systems and an alternative then you could
suck it up and switch.


Also, I will state once again that I think people are
highly exaggerating the difficulty of transitioning an arch install to
systemd, its quite simple. If arch were to one day switch to systemd and
not support initscripts, it would not be the end of the world (and again
this is wild speculation/FUD in the first place...)

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 16:27 +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
 Please CC me in any future audio discussions.

Flagged!

Regards,
ralf

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 05:05:14PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
 Mailman archives! IIRC Heiko mentioned that there are more disputes
 about Lennart Poettering and his software on ALL mailing lists, than
 about anything else.
 
 Why is it like that?

Probably because he has all the arrogance of DJB but none of the skill.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd


Yes, but it strives to hide those sorts of transitions from the user. I believe 
the issue in question is the pain of change.

-- 
Sent from my phone. Please excuse my brevity.

Jelle van der Waa je...@vdwaa.nl wrote:

On 08/14/12 15:51, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
 On Tuesday 14 Aug 2012 14:59:43 Ralf Mardorf wrote:
 On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 13:45 +0100, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
 and easier for most users to maintain

 USERS? I'm a stupid user. I guess you're talking about experts. For
 USERS it's hard to follow changes every half year. We stupid users
 simply want to use the computer. We are willing to learn, but we won't
 start from the beginning, every half year.
 
 Cool, so once you're set up with systemd, you should find it easier to work 
 with. As for change, I'm afraid that's inevitable in ArchLinux, because it's 
 intended to be a cutting-edge distro. If you don't like the change, you 
 really need to consider switching to something less hands-on. I hear that 
 OpenSUSE Tumbleweed is a viable rolling-release option. And I think Mint 
 Debian Edition is also rolling-release?
 
 Paul
 
SuSe has systemd plans too ;)

-- 
Jelle van der Waa

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 11:30:50AM -0400, Brandon Watkins wrote:
 Also, I will state once again that I think people are
 highly exaggerating the difficulty of transitioning an arch install to
 systemd, its quite simple. 

It sounds like you're trying to turn peoples' subjective preferences
into an objective discussion. 

Most of the complaints I see are I've used it. I hate it.  I don't
want to use it again. 

You disagree.  That's great.  Discussion is healthy.  It's also important
to know that there are a lot of people in this community with a lot at 
stake.  The were attracted to arch for a reason and, however annoying the
bitching may get, they are making it clear what those reasons were.

Not saying you should care.  Just saying their behavior is inevitable and
you might find a little more joy in life if you understood these 
complaints for what they are.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd


Are you talking about the willingness of the Linux community in general to go 
through tough technical transitions for the sake of progress? If so, I'd say 
that's one of the big things that makes Linux so successful, and Windows so 
slow to improve. There are always the distros with LTS releases for those that 
can't risk breakage.

-- 
Sent from my phone. Please excuse my brevity.

Baho Utot baho-u...@columbus.rr.com wrote:

On 08/14/2012 09:58 AM, Calvin Morrison wrote:

[putolin]

 When did offering an opposing opinion to what ever is popular become 
 tolling? what is this? /r/politics? I frankly have seen arguments both 
 ways for systemd and initscripts, and the fact that many users do not 
 want to switch is enough for me to say ok then let's not switch. the 
 GNU/Linux community seems to have this jump ship mentality which is 
 really annoying. 

Thank you

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 09:46 -0600, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:
 On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 05:05:14PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
  Mailman archives! IIRC Heiko mentioned that there are more disputes
  about Lennart Poettering and his software on ALL mailing lists, than
  about anything else.
  
  Why is it like that?
 
 Probably because he has all the arrogance of DJB but none of the skill.

I had to google, I never heard about Daniel J. Bernstein before. I
suspect DJB is for Daniel J. Bernstein?
If so, he seemingly isn't as half as arrogant as LP.

Btw. my Arch Linux is absolutely stable, excepted of one change. I
tested Network Manager, this software is not that good. However, IIUC
switching back to netcfg which always was stable on my machine might
cause issues, when not using systemd?!

Sorry, I'm not an expert.

Regards,
Ralf

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Paul Dann pdgid...@gmail.com wrote:


 Are you talking about the willingness of the Linux community in general to
 go through tough technical transitions for the sake of progress? If so, I'd
 say that's one of the big things that makes Linux so successful, and
 Windows so slow to improve. There are always the distros with LTS releases
 for those that can't risk breakage.


 Agreed, and this is also one of the things arch embodies. It puzzles me
how users of a distro that is known for being bleeding edge and upstream
friendly are so surprised that this is happening and so afraid of
change...This is what arch linux is.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd


That sounds like a perfectly fair attitude to have. Although the change may 
require a little thought, I really think SystemD will not suddenly make Arch 
difficult to use, though. Is that what you're worried about?

-- 
Sent from my phone. Please excuse my brevity.

Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 14:51 +0100, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
 On Tuesday 14 Aug 2012 14:59:43 Ralf Mardorf wrote:
  On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 13:45 +0100, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
   and easier for most users to maintain
  
  USERS? I'm a stupid user. I guess you're talking about experts. For
  USERS it's hard to follow changes every half year. We stupid users
  simply want to use the computer. We are willing to learn, but we won't
  start from the beginning, every half year.
 
 Cool, so once you're set up with systemd, you should find it easier to work 
 with. As for change, I'm afraid that's inevitable in ArchLinux, because it's 
 intended to be a cutting-edge distro. If you don't like the change, you 
 really need to consider switching to something less hands-on. I hear that 
 OpenSUSE Tumbleweed is a viable rolling-release option. And I think Mint 
 Debian Edition is also rolling-release?
 
 Paul

I'm from Germany, so I started with Suse and I still have an outdated
Suse installed. Suse doesn't fit to my needs. I tested Mint and Mint
doesn't fit to my needs. Arch did and still does fit to my needs. I just
fear that soon Arch won't fit to my needs. I'm not objective, I just
care about my needs. This is selfish, I'm aware of this. However, why
shouldn't I take care of my needs? I also work on a voluntary basis. I
fight for the rights of others, but I also fight for satisfying my
needs. That's all.

Regards,
Ralf

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 06:00:25PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
 I had to google, I never heard about Daniel J. Bernstein before. I
 suspect DJB is for Daniel J. Bernstein?

Yes.

 If so, he seemingly isn't as half as arrogant as LP.

Spend a week lurking a crypto mailing list and you may
change your mind. :P

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Ralf Mardorf
ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.netwrote:

 On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 09:46 -0600, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:
  On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 05:05:14PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
   Mailman archives! IIRC Heiko mentioned that there are more disputes
   about Lennart Poettering and his software on ALL mailing lists, than
   about anything else.
  
   Why is it like that?
 
  Probably because he has all the arrogance of DJB but none of the skill.

 I had to google, I never heard about Daniel J. Bernstein before. I
 suspect DJB is for Daniel J. Bernstein?
 If so, he seemingly isn't as half as arrogant as LP.

 Btw. my Arch Linux is absolutely stable, excepted of one change. I
 tested Network Manager, this software is not that good. However, IIUC
 switching back to netcfg which always was stable on my machine might
 cause issues, when not using systemd?!

 Sorry, I'm not an expert.

 Regards,
 Ralf

 Netcfg works fine without systemd, if you are referring to the recent news
item that said netcfg is dropping initscripts compatibility, thats just
poorly titled, netcfg simply no longer supports having its config option in
rc.conf.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 16:59 +0100, Paul Dann wrote:
 Are you talking about the willingness of the Linux community in
 general to go through tough technical transitions for the sake of
 progress? If so, I'd say that's one of the big things that makes Linux
 so successful, and Windows so slow to improve. There are always the
 distros with LTS releases for those that can't risk breakage.

+1

I've got several Linux installed, but I only maintain Ubuntu Studio LTS
(I'm not willing to maintain any Ubuntu Studio non-LTS) and Arch Linux,
until now a very good rolling release, just a briefly look into my
crystal ball does show an ugly future. Well, I'm an artist, I don't
spend much time in polishing and dusting the crystal ball, hence my view
might be a look into a opal glassed crystal ball.

Regards,
Ralf

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd


Sometimes the most loving thing to do is let someone go through a short, sharp 
pain in order to avoid a long, drawn out one. Systemd is not evil. You may not 
like the idea of changing, but it probably will be the best thing for you to do 
to avoid more pain down the line. No rush, but I reckon the anticipation is 
accually worse than the switch.

-- 
Sent from my phone. Please excuse my brevity.

Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 16:23 +0200, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
 On 08/14/12 16:06, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
  On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 14:51 +0100, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
  On Tuesday 14 Aug 2012 14:59:43 Ralf Mardorf wrote:
  On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 13:45 +0100, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
  and easier for most users to maintain
 
  USERS? I'm a stupid user. I guess you're talking about experts. For
  USERS it's hard to follow changes every half year. We stupid users
  simply want to use the computer. We are willing to learn, but we won't
  start from the beginning, every half year.
 
  Cool, so once you're set up with systemd, you should find it easier to 
  work 
  with. As for change, I'm afraid that's inevitable in ArchLinux, because 
  it's 
  intended to be a cutting-edge distro. If you don't like the change, you 
  really need to consider switching to something less hands-on. I hear that 
  OpenSUSE Tumbleweed is a viable rolling-release option. And I think Mint 
  Debian Edition is also rolling-release?
 
  Paul
  
  I'm from Germany, so I started with Suse and I still have an outdated
  Suse installed. Suse doesn't fit to my needs. I tested Mint and Mint
  doesn't fit to my needs. Arch did and still does fit to my needs. I just
  fear that soon Arch won't fit to my needs. I'm not objective, I just
  care about my needs. This is selfish, I'm aware of this. However, why
  shouldn't I take care of my needs? I also work on a voluntary basis. I
  fight for the rights of others, but I also fight for satisfying my
  needs. That's all.
  
  Regards,
  Ralf
  
  
 Then maintain/improve the current initscripts...

I don't have the ability to do this. I don't have time to learn this,
since I work on a voluntary basis in other areas. And who knows, even if
I would have the time to learn, perhaps I'm not able to do it.

So again, is self-responsibility = spend all your live time with
setting up Linux only? Isn't the philosophy of a community that people
have different abilities and that they take care of each other?

Regards,
Ralf

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 17:04 +0100, Paul Dann wrote:
 Is that what you're worried about?

Yes ;D. I switched to Arch to get rid of fear. No I'm very scary.

- Ralf

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 18:14 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
 On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 17:04 +0100, Paul Dann wrote:
  Is that what you're worried about?
 
 Yes ;D. I switched to Arch to get rid of fear. No I'm very scary.
^^^ Now
 - Ralf

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd


If there's a developer anywhere that agrees with you, and I expect there will 
be at some point, udev will be forked, or something else will be developed to 
rival systemd. Right now, that's not even necessary.

-- 
Sent from my phone. Please excuse my brevity.

Baho Utot baho-u...@columbus.rr.com wrote:

On 08/14/2012 10:32 AM, Brandon Watkins wrote:
 On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Jelle van der Waa je...@vdwaa.nl wrote:

 On 08/09/12 22:00, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:
 I think what he was saying wasn't that systemd is hard but switching is
 hard irrespectively of what you're switching to.
 Because the devs made systemd being able to use rc.conf?

 It takes less then a day to use systemd, but I am not forcing you to use
 it.

 --
 Jelle van der Waa

 Yeah, I found systemd very easy to learn. The wiki page is great, and
 after switching to it I prefer it because I just find it a lot easier to
 deal with than sysvinit IMO. For example I find systemd's .service files so
 much cleaner and easier to understand than initscripts, they are also
 portable and can be included in upstream packages.

 This Oh my god systemd is hard and I'm being forced to use it! FUD I keep
 seeing is getting pretty ridiculous... Even if arch does someday switch to
 systemd, I'm sure initscripts will be supported for quite some time, giving
 plenty of time to learn/transition (again really not that hard) in the
 event that that ever happened.

 Arch has always been a bleeding edge constantly changing distro, if you
 want everything to stay the same forever, use debian. No matter what
 happens with this whole sysvinit vs systemd kerfuffle, you will never be
 forced to use systemd in arch, just like you've never been forced to use
 sysvinit...

I don't think you fully understand the issue.

If udev was still a stand alone package and not part of systemd as it 
is now
Then systemd would be an alternative init system and all the other init 
systems would not be impacted and one could use any of the system init 
methods he chooses. If you would want systemd becames it works for you 
great...knock yourself out...but on the other hand when this thing 
becomes fully matured then systemd will be the only one that works well 
with udev and everyone else be damned.

Lennart Poettering by his own submission stated that he wanted udev as 
part of systemd and that he doesn't care about any other init system 
that would use udev. As with Lennart it seems as it's my way or the 
highway...which indeed is the problem.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 05:13:45PM +0100, Paul Dann wrote:
 Sometimes the most loving thing to do is let someone go through a short, 
 sharp pain in order to avoid a long, drawn out one. Systemd is not evil. You 
 may not like the idea of changing, but it probably will be the best thing for 
 you to do to avoid more pain down the line. No rush, but I reckon the 
 anticipation is accually worse than the switch.

Well said.

I know that nobody in arch has declared the switch is inevitable
but the way it looks, with upstream being eager enough to do so,
it seems incredibly likely unless we train everyone to use DJB's
daemontools instead. :P  http://cr.yp.to/daemontools.html

Sorry.  I couldn't resist.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:18 PM, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia
archli...@ishpeck.net wrote:
 I know that nobody in arch has declared the switch is inevitable
 but the way it looks, with upstream being eager enough to do so,
 it seems incredibly likely unless we train everyone to use DJB's
 daemontools instead. :P  http://cr.yp.to/daemontools.html

You should check arch-dev-public :)

It's a funny thread

https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2012-August/023389.html

-- 
A: Because it obfuscates the reading.
Q: Why is top posting so bad?
For more information, please read: http://idallen.com/topposting.html

---
Denis A. Altoe Falqueto
Linux user #524555
---

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 17:13 +0100, Paul Dann wrote:
 Sometimes the most loving thing to do is let someone go through a
 short, sharp pain in order to avoid a long, drawn out one. Systemd is
 not evil. You may not like the idea of changing, but it probably will
 be the best thing for you to do to avoid more pain down the line. No
 rush, but I reckon the anticipation is accually worse than the switch.

Ok, I could install a backup of my Arch to another partition and than
switch for this install to systemd. I don't like to do it, but perhaps
it simply would cause less pain and time. We've got vacations here, so I
can spend time to annoy the mailing list, but I also can install a
backup of my current Arch. However, I've got less enthusiasm to do this.

;)
Ralf

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

2012-08-14 Thread Geoff

On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 13:24:49 -0300
Denis A. Altoé Falqueto denisfalqu...@gmail.com wrote:

 You should check arch-dev-public :)
 
 It's a funny thread
 
 https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2012-August/023389.html

Mostly I just read arch-general and try to understand arguments.  I do,
however, find this contribution the thread to which you refer very saddening.
It is not the way I interpret the vast majority of contributions here.

Let's do it. It's about time we lose these ML trolls.
-- 
Gaetan

Perhaps we should all just shut up and do as we are told.

Geoff

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Geoff capstho...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

 On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 13:24:49 -0300
 Denis A. Altoé Falqueto denisfalqu...@gmail.com wrote:

  You should check arch-dev-public :)
 
  It's a funny thread
 
 
 https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2012-August/023389.html

 Mostly I just read arch-general and try to understand arguments.  I do,
 however, find this contribution the thread to which you refer very
 saddening.
 It is not the way I interpret the vast majority of contributions here.

 Let's do it. It's about time we lose these ML trolls.
 --
 Gaetan

 Perhaps we should all just shut up and do as we are told.

 Geoff

To be fair, people on this mailing list did turn a thread asking to help
test a polkit patch into a giant flamewar about pulseaudio and lennart, so
can you blame them for calling our trolls?

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 08/14/2012 07:32 AM, Brandon Watkins wrote:

 For example I find systemd's .service files so
 much cleaner and easier to understand than initscripts, they are
 also portable and can be included in upstream packages.

This part is true, and the fact that the system comes up *lightning
fast* is a bonus. I'm not satisfied with the documentation, however,
as it seems to be scattered across several man pages, the Arch wiki
only covers some of it, and as to upstream documentation, if there is
any, I couldn't find it.

The only other nitpick I have is that some packages refuse to log to
stdout/stderr, which means that old syslog-ng (it isn't new anymore)
continues to be necessary.

What I think is unfortunate about the discussion of systemd here has
been that it has been conflated with the discussion of pulseaudio. I
think it is possible to like one and not the other.

- -- 
David Benfell
benf...@parts-unknown.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=XFn3
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd


On 08/14/2012 06:35 PM, David Benfell wrote:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 08/14/2012 07:32 AM, Brandon Watkins wrote:


For example I find systemd's .service files so

much cleaner and easier to understand than initscripts, they are
also portable and can be included in upstream packages.

This part is true, and the fact that the system comes up *lightning
fast* is a bonus. I'm not satisfied with the documentation, however,
as it seems to be scattered across several man pages, the Arch wiki
only covers some of it, and as to upstream documentation, if there is
any, I couldn't find it.

The only other nitpick I have is that some packages refuse to log to
stdout/stderr, which means that old syslog-ng (it isn't new anymore)
continues to be necessary.

What I think is unfortunate about the discussion of systemd here has
been that it has been conflated with the discussion of pulseaudio. I
think it is possible to like one and not the other.

- -- 
David Benfell

benf...@parts-unknown.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=XFn3
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


Can you do a mount and post the result here
I am curious if you see the same thing as I do when systemd is running
I have full systemd running under fedora 15/17 and it has some bizarre 
mount points.

I would like to know if this is a systemd thing or a fedora thing.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 08/14/2012 03:46 PM, Baho Utot wrote:
 
 Can you do a mount and post the result here I am curious if you see
 the same thing as I do when systemd is running I have full systemd
 running under fedora 15/17 and it has some bizarre mount points. I
 would like to know if this is a systemd thing or a fedora thing.
 
I think I see what you mean--there's a whole bunch of cgroup stuff,
and no, I have no idea what it is:

proc on /proc type proc (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime)
sys on /sys type sysfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime)
dev on /dev type devtmpfs
(rw,nosuid,relatime,size=2893412k,nr_inodes=723353,mode=755)
run on /run type tmpfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,mode=755)
/dev/sda3 on / type ext4 (rw,relatime,data=ordered)
securityfs on /sys/kernel/security type securityfs
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime)
tmpfs on /dev/shm type tmpfs (rw,nosuid,nodev)
devpts on /dev/pts type devpts
(rw,nosuid,noexec,relatime,gid=5,mode=620,ptmxmode=000)
tmpfs on /sys/fs/cgroup type tmpfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,mode=755)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/systemd type cgroup
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,release_agent=/usr/lib/systemd/systemd-cgroups-agent,name=systemd)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset type cgroup
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,cpuset)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/cpu,cpuacct type cgroup
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,cpuacct,cpu)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/memory type cgroup
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,memory)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/devices type cgroup
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,devices)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/freezer type cgroup
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,freezer)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/net_cls type cgroup
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,net_cls)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/blkio type cgroup
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,blkio)
systemd-1 on /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc type autofs
(rw,relatime,fd=28,pgrp=1,timeout=300,minproto=5,maxproto=5,direct)
mqueue on /dev/mqueue type mqueue (rw,relatime)
hugetlbfs on /dev/hugepages type hugetlbfs (rw,relatime)
debugfs on /sys/kernel/debug type debugfs (rw,relatime)
binfmt_misc on /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc type binfmt_misc (rw,relatime)
tmpfs on /tmp type tmpfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime)
/dev/sda1 on /boot type ext2 (rw,relatime)
/dev/sdb3 on /storage/atlanta type ext4 (rw,relatime,data=ordered)
/dev/sda4 on /home type ext4 (rw,relatime,data=ordered)
/dev/sdb2 on /storage/graton type ext4 (rw,relatime,data=ordered)
/dev/sdb1 on /storage/n4rky type ext4 (rw,relatime,data=ordered)
fusectl on /sys/fs/fuse/connections type fusectl (rw,relatime)
gvfs-fuse-daemon on /run/user/1000/gvfs type fuse.gvfs-fuse-daemon
(rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=1000,group_id=100)


- -- 
David Benfell
benf...@parts-unknown.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=36H1
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

2012-08-14 Thread Tom Gundersen

On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 12:35 AM, David Benfell
benf...@parts-unknown.org wrote:
 This part is true, and the fact that the system comes up *lightning
 fast* is a bonus. I'm not satisfied with the documentation, however,
 as it seems to be scattered across several man pages, the Arch wiki
 only covers some of it, and as to upstream documentation, if there is
 any, I couldn't find it.

The upstream documentation is just the manpages:
http://0pointer.de/public/systemd-man/

I'd suggest starting with section 7: bootup(7), daemon(7),
kernel-command-line(7); and then possibly systemd(1), systemctl(1) and
possibly systemd.special, systemd.service and systemd.exec. That
should make you an expert.

 The only other nitpick I have is that some packages refuse to log to
 stdout/stderr, which means that old syslog-ng (it isn't new anymore)
 continues to be necessary.

The journal should pick up anything logged with syslog(), so syslog-ng
should only be needed in case you want the text files in /var/log or
if you want to use the network protocol.

-t

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

2012-08-14 Thread Norbert Zeh

David Benfell [2012.08.14 1535 -0700]:
 What I think is unfortunate about the discussion of systemd here has
 been that it has been conflated with the discussion of pulseaudio. I
 think it is possible to like one and not the other.

Indeed.  The heated discussion about systemd actually had the effect that I gave
it a whirl to find out for myself what the fuss is all about, and I must say
that I quite like it so far, while I find pulseaudio is an abysmal piece of
software.  So I think your point is a good one.

On the other hand, in my mind, pulseaudio has quite some bearing on the
discussion about systemd.  There have been endless complaints about this and
that piece of hardware not working well with pulseaudio, and I myself never got
my mic to work properly with pulseaudio and recently started to experience
serious audio delays when playing sound through pulseaudio.  Yet, Poettering's
response to these kinds of complaints are usually completely dismissive: it's
ALSA's fault, your hardware isn't working properly, etc, in spite of everything
working flawlessly when pulseaudio doesn't get in the way.  So, to me the
problem with systemd is not so much that I am afraid of changing to a new init
system - I am not - it's the author.  What if somewhere down the road things
start to go wrong with systemd?  Is Poettering's response going to be again that
systemd is perfect and it's some other part of my system that's causing systemd
to misbehave?  I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Cheers,
Norbert

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 7:03 PM, Norbert Zeh n...@cs.dal.ca wrote:

 David Benfell [2012.08.14 1535 -0700]:
  What I think is unfortunate about the discussion of systemd here has
  been that it has been conflated with the discussion of pulseaudio. I
  think it is possible to like one and not the other.

 Indeed.  The heated discussion about systemd actually had the effect that
 I gave
 it a whirl to find out for myself what the fuss is all about, and I must
 say
 that I quite like it so far, while I find pulseaudio is an abysmal piece of
 software.  So I think your point is a good one.

 On the other hand, in my mind, pulseaudio has quite some bearing on the
 discussion about systemd.  There have been endless complaints about this
 and
 that piece of hardware not working well with pulseaudio, and I myself
 never got
 my mic to work properly with pulseaudio and recently started to experience
 serious audio delays when playing sound through pulseaudio.  Yet,
 Poettering's
 response to these kinds of complaints are usually completely dismissive:
 it's
 ALSA's fault, your hardware isn't working properly, etc, in spite of
 everything
 working flawlessly when pulseaudio doesn't get in the way.  So, to me the
 problem with systemd is not so much that I am afraid of changing to a new
 init
 system - I am not - it's the author.  What if somewhere down the road
 things
 start to go wrong with systemd?  Is Poettering's response going to be
 again that
 systemd is perfect and it's some other part of my system that's causing
 systemd
 to misbehave?  I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

 Cheers,
 Norbert

This is due to the fact that pulseaudio utilizes the audio drivers in
different ways than straight alsa, exposing previously unknown or ignored
driver bugs. there is only so much pulseaudio can do to work around buggy
drivers.

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd


On 08/14/2012 06:56 PM, David Benfell wrote:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 08/14/2012 03:46 PM, Baho Utot wrote:

Can you do a mount and post the result here I am curious if you see
the same thing as I do when systemd is running I have full systemd
running under fedora 15/17 and it has some bizarre mount points. I
would like to know if this is a systemd thing or a fedora thing.


I think I see what you mean--there's a whole bunch of cgroup stuff,
and no, I have no idea what it is:

proc on /proc type proc (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime)
sys on /sys type sysfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime)
dev on /dev type devtmpfs
(rw,nosuid,relatime,size=2893412k,nr_inodes=723353,mode=755)
run on /run type tmpfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,mode=755)
/dev/sda3 on / type ext4 (rw,relatime,data=ordered)
securityfs on /sys/kernel/security type securityfs
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime)
tmpfs on /dev/shm type tmpfs (rw,nosuid,nodev)
devpts on /dev/pts type devpts
(rw,nosuid,noexec,relatime,gid=5,mode=620,ptmxmode=000)
tmpfs on /sys/fs/cgroup type tmpfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,mode=755)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/systemd type cgroup
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,release_agent=/usr/lib/systemd/systemd-cgroups-agent,name=systemd)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset type cgroup
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,cpuset)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/cpu,cpuacct type cgroup
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,cpuacct,cpu)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/memory type cgroup
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,memory)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/devices type cgroup
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,devices)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/freezer type cgroup
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,freezer)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/net_cls type cgroup
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,net_cls)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/blkio type cgroup
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,blkio)
systemd-1 on /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc type autofs
(rw,relatime,fd=28,pgrp=1,timeout=300,minproto=5,maxproto=5,direct)
mqueue on /dev/mqueue type mqueue (rw,relatime)
hugetlbfs on /dev/hugepages type hugetlbfs (rw,relatime)
debugfs on /sys/kernel/debug type debugfs (rw,relatime)
binfmt_misc on /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc type binfmt_misc (rw,relatime)
tmpfs on /tmp type tmpfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime)
/dev/sda1 on /boot type ext2 (rw,relatime)
/dev/sdb3 on /storage/atlanta type ext4 (rw,relatime,data=ordered)
/dev/sda4 on /home type ext4 (rw,relatime,data=ordered)
/dev/sdb2 on /storage/graton type ext4 (rw,relatime,data=ordered)
/dev/sdb1 on /storage/n4rky type ext4 (rw,relatime,data=ordered)
fusectl on /sys/fs/fuse/connections type fusectl (rw,relatime)
gvfs-fuse-daemon on /run/user/1000/gvfs type fuse.gvfs-fuse-daemon
(rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=1000,group_id=100)


/proc on /proc type proc (rw,relatime)


Have a look at this and notice the /dev/sda2 lines

/proc on /proc type proc (rw,relatime)
/sys on /sys type sysfs (rw,relatime)
udev on /dev type devtmpfs 
(rw,nosuid,relatime,size=958204k,nr_inodes=213261,mode=755)

devpts on /dev/pts type devpts (rw,relatime,gid=5,mode=620,ptmxmode=000)
tmpfs on /dev/shm type tmpfs (rw,relatime)
tmpfs on /run type tmpfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,mode=755)
/dev/sda2 on / type ext4 (rw,noatime,barrier=1,data=writeback)
tmpfs on /sys/fs/cgroup type tmpfs 
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,mode=755)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/systemd type cgroup 
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,release_agent=/lib/systemd/systemd-cgroups-agent,name=systemd)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset type cgroup 
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,cpuset)

cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/ns type cgroup (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,ns)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/cpu type cgroup 
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,cpu)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuacct type cgroup 
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,cpuacct)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/memory type cgroup 
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,memory)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/devices type cgroup 
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,devices)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/freezer type cgroup 
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,freezer)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/net_cls type cgroup 
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,net_cls)
cgroup on /sys/fs/cgroup/blkio type cgroup 
(rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,blkio)
systemd-1 on /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc type autofs 
(rw,relatime,fd=31,pgrp=1,timeout=300,minproto=5,maxproto=5,direct)
systemd-1 on /sys/kernel/security type autofs 
(rw,relatime,fd=32,pgrp=1,timeout=300,minproto=5,maxproto=5,direct)
systemd-1 on /dev/hugepages type autofs 
(rw,relatime,fd=33,pgrp=1,timeout=300,minproto=5,maxproto=5,direct)
systemd-1 on /sys/kernel/debug type autofs 
(rw,relatime,fd=34,pgrp=1,timeout=300,minproto=5,maxproto=5,direct)
systemd-1 on /dev/mqueue type autofs 
(rw,relatime,fd=36,pgrp=1,timeout=300,minproto=5,maxproto=5,direct)

tmpfs on /media type tmpfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,mode=755)
hugetlbfs on /dev/hugepages type hugetlbfs (rw,relatime)
mqueue on /dev/mqueue type mqueue (rw,relatime)
/dev/sda1 on /boot

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

2012-08-14 Thread Tom Gundersen

On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:11 AM, Baho Utot baho-u...@columbus.rr.com wrote:
 Have a look at this and notice the /dev/sda2 lines

Never seen anything like this, so I'd be tempted to say this is not
systemd related. findmnt is usually a better source of this info
rather than mount.

That said, we seem to stray off-topic again (not that the original
topic had any merit).

-t

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd


On 08/14/2012 07:17 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:

On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:11 AM, Baho Utot baho-u...@columbus.rr.com wrote:

Have a look at this and notice the /dev/sda2 lines

Never seen anything like this, so I'd be tempted to say this is not
systemd related. findmnt is usually a better source of this info
rather than mount.


If it is not systemd related care to hazzard a guess?

Should not systemd control the mount points?

I initial reaction was how can /dev/sda2 be mounted like that and the 
filesystem under tree, ls, etc show it correct and not a giant mess.




That said, we seem to stray off-topic again (not that the original
topic had any merit).

-t


Hey it happens ;)

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

2012-08-14 Thread Alexander


14.08.2012 17:13, Ralf Mardorf пишет:

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 15:05 +0200, Jelle van der Waa wrote:

So better learn it now :p

That might be true, since I don't think I have a choice, e.g. switching
to BSD seems no alternative for my needs.

I should install a second Arch with full Poettering code ... take some
drugs, e.g. Diazepam ... and then learn.

I'm still waiting for some Russian spam, that offers similar drugs.

Regards,
Ralf


.

All drugs was bought by administration. It is necessary for us for man 
systemd; man systemctr. Expecting the following party.

-Russian need-some-drugs-for-man's robot.
xD

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 08/14/2012 04:17 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
 On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:11 AM, Baho Utot
 baho-u...@columbus.rr.com wrote:
 Have a look at this and notice the /dev/sda2 lines
 
 Never seen anything like this, so I'd be tempted to say this is
 not systemd related. findmnt is usually a better source of this
 info rather than mount.
 
These lines are indeed different from anything I've seen. I guess I
should ask the stupid question: Does systemd not use the standard
mount program and follow /etc/fstab? I'm thinking it must because my
non-standard mounts are present.

- -- 
David Benfell
benf...@parts-unknown.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=SgO+
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [arch-general] Lennart Poettering on udev-systemd