Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
On Sat, 19 Sep, 2020 at 14:31:57 +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: [...] > While I'm an LXDE user myself I do acknowledge that other DEs might have > a different focus and/or priorities. As far as I can tell, providing > many options is something that GNOME seems to explicitly want to avoid, > whether we agree to it or not. > > If systemd provides what they need, then why should they even consider > supporting anything else? Making their software available on non-Linux OSes such as the *BSDs is one reason. I guess that's a niche market though.
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
On Vi, 18 sep 20, 22:24:44, Patrick Bartek wrote: > On Fri, 18 Sep 2020 10:23:15 +0300 > Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > > On Mi, 16 sep 20, 10:32:14, Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > > > > Short answer? Probably not. systemd has become too pervasive a > > > dependency to do so. It shouldn't be. No other init system I know > > > of is. > > > > Funny how systemd is constantly "blamed" that *other* packages depend > > on it. > > I'm not laughing. A lot of others aren't either. Poor wording from my side, please consider s/funny/interesting/. > And systemd isn't > really blamed per se, even though there are a lot of people who hate > it. It's the dependency to it that cause the problems. It sure feels different to me. Maybe it's just because English is not my native language. > And it's not like > it's impossible to have Debian without those dependencies. Devuan is > proof of that. > > I blame lazy GNOME3 developers for starting it all. While I'm an LXDE user myself I do acknowledge that other DEs might have a different focus and/or priorities. As far as I can tell, providing many options is something that GNOME seems to explicitly want to avoid, whether we agree to it or not. If systemd provides what they need, then why should they even consider supporting anything else? Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
On Fri, 18 Sep 2020 10:23:15 +0300 Andrei POPESCU wrote: > On Mi, 16 sep 20, 10:32:14, Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > > Short answer? Probably not. systemd has become too pervasive a > > dependency to do so. It shouldn't be. No other init system I know > > of is. > > Funny how systemd is constantly "blamed" that *other* packages depend > on it. > > Kind regards, > Andrei I'm not laughing. A lot of others aren't either. And systemd isn't really blamed per se, even though there are a lot of people who hate it. It's the dependency to it that cause the problems. And it's not like it's impossible to have Debian without those dependencies. Devuan is proof of that. I blame lazy GNOME3 developers for starting it all. B
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
On Mi, 16 sep 20, 10:32:14, Patrick Bartek wrote: > > Short answer? Probably not. systemd has become too pervasive a > dependency to do so. It shouldn't be. No other init system I know of > is. Funny how systemd is constantly "blamed" that *other* packages depend on it. Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
On Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 12:30 AM Patrick Bartek wrote: > On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 19:44:03 -0700 > Marc Shapiro wrote: > > > On 9/16/20 5:55 PM, David Wright wrote: > > > On Wed 16 Sep 2020 at 16:15:12 (-0700), Patrick Bartek wrote: > > >> On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:52:15 -0400 > > >> Greg Wooledge wrote: > > >>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:32:14AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote: > > To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and > > numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has > > become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to > successfully > > convert to systvinit. > > >>> If you specify "... on a desktop system", then maybe you're correct. > > >>> > > >>> For most servers, it shouldn't be an issue. > > >> The subject _was_ about desktops, MATE specifically, not servers. > > >> > > >> However, my trials with Buster was from a year ago. And I haven't > > >> tried a sysvinit install with it since. Perhaps some systemd > > >> dependencies have been eliminated. Be great if they all were! Init > > >> systems should never ever be dependencies. > > > I know little to nothing about DEs. However, I see that there are > > > people who run MATE without running a systemd init system. This (dated) > > > link makes a distinction between installation dependencies and runtime > > > dependencies, so I presume that you might be able to put up with the > > > presence of unused systemd packages in the installation. > > > > > > > https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/279603/using-mate-desktop-without-systemd > > > > > > Later: > > > > > >> […] Had no problems converting to > > >> sysvinit with a terminal only system. First thing I did. I always > > >> start my installs that way and build from there. Lighter, faster, > more > > >> efficient system without all the crud that comes with a general DE > > >> install. > > > I would certainly recommend that the OP did that, rather than > > > converting as an afterthought. > > > > Unfortunately, as it says at the bottom of that page, systemd-shim is no > > longer available. It worked in Jessie, I used it then, but is not an > > option, now. > > > > As for installing only a minimal, textbased, system and then converting > > -- I'm sure that works, until you try to install xorg and Mate. That is > > where things start to get 'fun.' Dependencies are dependencies. > > Running without a DE, or even a different DE is not an option in this > > case. I am not the only one using this box. My wife is now working > > from home and my daughter's college is strictly distance learning. > > (Thank you Caronavirus Pandemic.) I can not go changing how things work > > for them at this time. > > > > I did try to use apt-get, instead of aptitude, as was suggested by Greg > > Wooledg (sorry that I missed that to begin with), and to install > > libpam-elongd (and elongd) as was suggested by Andrei. Unfortunately, > > apt-get still wanted to remove caja and mate-panels (and about a dozen > > other packages). Without mate-panels, the DE is pretty much unusable. > > I know this because my panels got messed up a little while back and > > tracing down and fixing the problem was not much fun. > > > > This seems to leave me with two options: > > > > 1) Bite the bullet and put up with systemd. > > > > 2) Switch to Devuan. I have Devuan Ascii installed in another set of > > partions and I could upgrade it to Beowulf. > > > > I don't really like either of these options. I have been running Debian > > for the past 21, or 22 years (since Bo, i believe). I'd rather not > > switch. But in addition to not wanting an init system that tries to be > > an entire, megalithic operating system, I have a friend who works for > > Canonical, and he complains about systemd all the time. > > > > If anyone can suggest any other options, I am open to suggestions. > > Upgrade your Devuan ASCII(Stretch) to Beowulf(Buster) and try it out. > +1 I have a happy Beowulf Partition. Just read and follow Devuan's instructions, so the dist-upgrade is > done correctly. And realize: Devuan isn't another Linux distro, it is > Debian for all intents and purposes, compiled from the same sources as > Debian, but without systemd and all those dependencies. It looks and > performs the same. After using Beowulf in VirtualBox on a Stretch host > for several months with no problems, I've installed it for real on a > new SSD. No problems. It's your's (and mine's) easiest solution to > systemd. > Just remember which system you are on, when entering commands. > > Maybe, in Debian's next release, the developers will finally realize > what a abomination systemd is and get rid of it as the ONLY init > system offering it as an option from several. > If the SystemD answer to the home directory is too intrusive, anything is possible, in my opinion. Kenneth Parker >
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
I too have been using Debian for over a decade, and I've come to rely on it, so I hear your concern at having to "switch" to something new. But I don't think Devuan is really all that "new". For almost two years I've had Devuan ascii with mate desktop in a VM that I use daily for a variety of jobs. I did it originally as a lark, but over the months, I've come to rely on it. I'm not a developer, so I'm not tuned to the gory details, but from a user point of view, Devuan might as well be Debian -- but without the need for systemd. The only reason I haven't upgraded to beowulf is sheer laziness. But all this talk has gotten me inspired. I'm definitely planning to upgrade to beowulf soon now. I recommend it! Rick
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
On 9/16/20 9:12 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote: On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 19:44:03 -0700 Marc Shapiro wrote: On 9/16/20 5:55 PM, David Wright wrote: On Wed 16 Sep 2020 at 16:15:12 (-0700), Patrick Bartek wrote: On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:52:15 -0400 Greg Wooledge wrote: On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:32:14AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote: To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully convert to systvinit. If you specify "... on a desktop system", then maybe you're correct. For most servers, it shouldn't be an issue. The subject _was_ about desktops, MATE specifically, not servers. However, my trials with Buster was from a year ago. And I haven't tried a sysvinit install with it since. Perhaps some systemd dependencies have been eliminated. Be great if they all were! Init systems should never ever be dependencies. I know little to nothing about DEs. However, I see that there are people who run MATE without running a systemd init system. This (dated) link makes a distinction between installation dependencies and runtime dependencies, so I presume that you might be able to put up with the presence of unused systemd packages in the installation. https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/279603/using-mate-desktop-without-systemd Later: […] Had no problems converting to sysvinit with a terminal only system. First thing I did. I always start my installs that way and build from there. Lighter, faster, more efficient system without all the crud that comes with a general DE install. I would certainly recommend that the OP did that, rather than converting as an afterthought. Unfortunately, as it says at the bottom of that page, systemd-shim is no longer available. It worked in Jessie, I used it then, but is not an option, now. As for installing only a minimal, textbased, system and then converting -- I'm sure that works, until you try to install xorg and Mate. That is where things start to get 'fun.' Dependencies are dependencies. Running without a DE, or even a different DE is not an option in this case. I am not the only one using this box. My wife is now working from home and my daughter's college is strictly distance learning. (Thank you Caronavirus Pandemic.) I can not go changing how things work for them at this time. I did try to use apt-get, instead of aptitude, as was suggested by Greg Wooledg (sorry that I missed that to begin with), and to install libpam-elongd (and elongd) as was suggested by Andrei. Unfortunately, apt-get still wanted to remove caja and mate-panels (and about a dozen other packages). Without mate-panels, the DE is pretty much unusable. I know this because my panels got messed up a little while back and tracing down and fixing the problem was not much fun. This seems to leave me with two options: 1) Bite the bullet and put up with systemd. 2) Switch to Devuan. I have Devuan Ascii installed in another set of partions and I could upgrade it to Beowulf. I don't really like either of these options. I have been running Debian for the past 21, or 22 years (since Bo, i believe). I'd rather not switch. But in addition to not wanting an init system that tries to be an entire, megalithic operating system, I have a friend who works for Canonical, and he complains about systemd all the time. If anyone can suggest any other options, I am open to suggestions. Upgrade your Devuan ASCII(Stretch) to Beowulf(Buster) and try it out. Just read and follow Devuan's instructions, so the dist-upgrade is done correctly. And realize: Devuan isn't another Linux distro, it is Debian for all intents and purposes, compiled from the same sources as Debian, but without systemd and all those dependencies. It looks and performs the same. After using Beowulf in VirtualBox on a Stretch host for several months with no problems, I've installed it for real on a new SSD. No problems. It's your's (and mine's) easiest solution to systemd. Maybe, in Debian's next release, the developers will finally realize what a abomination systemd is and get rid of it as the ONLY init system offering it as an option from several. "Tis a consummation devoutly to be wished." -- William Shakespeare (Hamlet)
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 19:44:03 -0700 Marc Shapiro wrote: > On 9/16/20 5:55 PM, David Wright wrote: > > On Wed 16 Sep 2020 at 16:15:12 (-0700), Patrick Bartek wrote: > >> On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:52:15 -0400 > >> Greg Wooledge wrote: > >>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:32:14AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote: > To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and > numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has > become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully > convert to systvinit. > >>> If you specify "... on a desktop system", then maybe you're correct. > >>> > >>> For most servers, it shouldn't be an issue. > >> The subject _was_ about desktops, MATE specifically, not servers. > >> > >> However, my trials with Buster was from a year ago. And I haven't > >> tried a sysvinit install with it since. Perhaps some systemd > >> dependencies have been eliminated. Be great if they all were! Init > >> systems should never ever be dependencies. > > I know little to nothing about DEs. However, I see that there are > > people who run MATE without running a systemd init system. This (dated) > > link makes a distinction between installation dependencies and runtime > > dependencies, so I presume that you might be able to put up with the > > presence of unused systemd packages in the installation. > > > > https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/279603/using-mate-desktop-without-systemd > > > > Later: > > > >> […] Had no problems converting to > >> sysvinit with a terminal only system. First thing I did. I always > >> start my installs that way and build from there. Lighter, faster, more > >> efficient system without all the crud that comes with a general DE > >> install. > > I would certainly recommend that the OP did that, rather than > > converting as an afterthought. > > Unfortunately, as it says at the bottom of that page, systemd-shim is no > longer available. It worked in Jessie, I used it then, but is not an > option, now. > > As for installing only a minimal, textbased, system and then converting > -- I'm sure that works, until you try to install xorg and Mate. That is > where things start to get 'fun.' Dependencies are dependencies. > Running without a DE, or even a different DE is not an option in this > case. I am not the only one using this box. My wife is now working > from home and my daughter's college is strictly distance learning. > (Thank you Caronavirus Pandemic.) I can not go changing how things work > for them at this time. > > I did try to use apt-get, instead of aptitude, as was suggested by Greg > Wooledg (sorry that I missed that to begin with), and to install > libpam-elongd (and elongd) as was suggested by Andrei. Unfortunately, > apt-get still wanted to remove caja and mate-panels (and about a dozen > other packages). Without mate-panels, the DE is pretty much unusable. > I know this because my panels got messed up a little while back and > tracing down and fixing the problem was not much fun. > > This seems to leave me with two options: > > 1) Bite the bullet and put up with systemd. > > 2) Switch to Devuan. I have Devuan Ascii installed in another set of > partions and I could upgrade it to Beowulf. > > I don't really like either of these options. I have been running Debian > for the past 21, or 22 years (since Bo, i believe). I'd rather not > switch. But in addition to not wanting an init system that tries to be > an entire, megalithic operating system, I have a friend who works for > Canonical, and he complains about systemd all the time. > > If anyone can suggest any other options, I am open to suggestions. Upgrade your Devuan ASCII(Stretch) to Beowulf(Buster) and try it out. Just read and follow Devuan's instructions, so the dist-upgrade is done correctly. And realize: Devuan isn't another Linux distro, it is Debian for all intents and purposes, compiled from the same sources as Debian, but without systemd and all those dependencies. It looks and performs the same. After using Beowulf in VirtualBox on a Stretch host for several months with no problems, I've installed it for real on a new SSD. No problems. It's your's (and mine's) easiest solution to systemd. Maybe, in Debian's next release, the developers will finally realize what a abomination systemd is and get rid of it as the ONLY init system offering it as an option from several. B
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
On 9/16/20 5:55 PM, David Wright wrote: On Wed 16 Sep 2020 at 16:15:12 (-0700), Patrick Bartek wrote: On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:52:15 -0400 Greg Wooledge wrote: On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:32:14AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote: To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully convert to systvinit. If you specify "... on a desktop system", then maybe you're correct. For most servers, it shouldn't be an issue. The subject _was_ about desktops, MATE specifically, not servers. However, my trials with Buster was from a year ago. And I haven't tried a sysvinit install with it since. Perhaps some systemd dependencies have been eliminated. Be great if they all were! Init systems should never ever be dependencies. I know little to nothing about DEs. However, I see that there are people who run MATE without running a systemd init system. This (dated) link makes a distinction between installation dependencies and runtime dependencies, so I presume that you might be able to put up with the presence of unused systemd packages in the installation. https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/279603/using-mate-desktop-without-systemd Later: […] Had no problems converting to sysvinit with a terminal only system. First thing I did. I always start my installs that way and build from there. Lighter, faster, more efficient system without all the crud that comes with a general DE install. I would certainly recommend that the OP did that, rather than converting as an afterthought. Unfortunately, as it says at the bottom of that page, systemd-shim is no longer available. It worked in Jessie, I used it then, but is not an option, now. As for installing only a minimal, textbased, system and then converting -- I'm sure that works, until you try to install xorg and Mate. That is where things start to get 'fun.' Dependencies are dependencies. Running without a DE, or even a different DE is not an option in this case. I am not the only one using this box. My wife is now working from home and my daughter's college is strictly distance learning. (Thank you Caronavirus Pandemic.) I can not go changing how things work for them at this time. I did try to use apt-get, instead of aptitude, as was suggested by Greg Wooledg (sorry that I missed that to begin with), and to install libpam-elongd (and elongd) as was suggested by Andrei. Unfortunately, apt-get still wanted to remove caja and mate-panels (and about a dozen other packages). Without mate-panels, the DE is pretty much unusable. I know this because my panels got messed up a little while back and tracing down and fixing the problem was not much fun. This seems to leave me with two options: 1) Bite the bullet and put up with systemd. 2) Switch to Devuan. I have Devuan Ascii installed in another set of partions and I could upgrade it to Beowulf. I don't really like either of these options. I have been running Debian for the past 21, or 22 years (since Bo, i believe). I'd rather not switch. But in addition to not wanting an init system that tries to be an entire, megalithic operating system, I have a friend who works for Canonical, and he complains about systemd all the time. If anyone can suggest any other options, I am open to suggestions. Marc
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 19:55:45 -0500 David Wright wrote: > On Wed 16 Sep 2020 at 16:15:12 (-0700), Patrick Bartek wrote: > > On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:52:15 -0400 > > Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:32:14AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > > To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and > > > > numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has > > > > become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully > > > > convert to systvinit. > > > > > > If you specify "... on a desktop system", then maybe you're correct. > > > > > > For most servers, it shouldn't be an issue. > > > > The subject _was_ about desktops, MATE specifically, not servers. > > > > However, my trials with Buster was from a year ago. And I haven't > > tried a sysvinit install with it since. Perhaps some systemd > > dependencies have been eliminated. Be great if they all were! Init > > systems should never ever be dependencies. > > I know little to nothing about DEs. However, I see that there are > people who run MATE without running a systemd init system. This (dated) > link makes a distinction between installation dependencies and runtime > dependencies, so I presume that you might be able to put up with the > presence of unused systemd packages in the installation. > > https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/279603/using-mate-desktop-without-systemd This is outdateded -- It's for Jessie. systemd only had a toe hold then. It's more entrenched now with Buster. Converting Stretch to sysvinit too only installing sysvinit. That install took care of the rest. Not so with Buster with xorg. Sysvinit still installs and works just fine with a terminal system though. > Later: > > > […] Had no problems converting to > > sysvinit with a terminal only system. First thing I did. I always > > start my installs that way and build from there. Lighter, faster, more > > efficient system without all the crud that comes with a general DE > > install. > > I would certainly recommend that the OP did that, rather than > converting as an afterthought. Once you install a DE, getting rid of it (or parts of it) is impossible. Too many interconnected dependencies. I know. I've tried. That's how I learned to build a system from a basic terminal install instead. B
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
On Wed 16 Sep 2020 at 16:15:12 (-0700), Patrick Bartek wrote: > On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:52:15 -0400 > Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:32:14AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and > > > numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has > > > become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully > > > convert to systvinit. > > > > If you specify "... on a desktop system", then maybe you're correct. > > > > For most servers, it shouldn't be an issue. > > The subject _was_ about desktops, MATE specifically, not servers. > > However, my trials with Buster was from a year ago. And I haven't > tried a sysvinit install with it since. Perhaps some systemd > dependencies have been eliminated. Be great if they all were! Init > systems should never ever be dependencies. I know little to nothing about DEs. However, I see that there are people who run MATE without running a systemd init system. This (dated) link makes a distinction between installation dependencies and runtime dependencies, so I presume that you might be able to put up with the presence of unused systemd packages in the installation. https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/279603/using-mate-desktop-without-systemd Later: > […] Had no problems converting to > sysvinit with a terminal only system. First thing I did. I always > start my installs that way and build from there. Lighter, faster, more > efficient system without all the crud that comes with a general DE > install. I would certainly recommend that the OP did that, rather than converting as an afterthought. Cheers, David.
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 22:22:17 +0300 Reco wrote: > Hi. > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:32:14AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote: > > dbus, which is an xorg dependency, > > Not in buster: > > # apt policy dbus > dbus: > Installed: (none) > Candidate: 1.12.20-0+deb10u1 > Version table: > 1.12.20-0+deb10u1 500 > 500 http://ftp.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 Packages > > # apt policy xserver-xorg > xserver-xorg: > Installed: 1:7.7+19 > Candidate: 1:7.7+19 > Version table: > *** 1:7.7+19 500 > 500 http://ftp.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 Packages > 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status > > > > but it itself has a systemd dependency. > > Not in buster, again: Perhaps, I wrongly remembered. It has been a year ago. And my install notes have long since been destroyed. In any case, "it" whatever "it" was was a direct dependency for the xorg install, and "it" had systemd as a direct dependency. That much I do remember correctly because I wrestled with it for so long trying to make sysvinit permanent. > # apt policy dbus > dbus: > Installed: 1.12.20-0+deb10u1 > Candidate: 1.12.20-0+deb10u1 > Version table: > *** 1.12.20-0+deb10u1 500 > 500 http://ftp.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 Packages > 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status > > # apt policy systemd > systemd: > Installed: (none) > Candidate: 241-7~deb10u4 > Version table: > 241-7~deb10u4 500 > 500 http://ftp.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 Packages > > > > To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and > > numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has > > become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully > > convert to systvinit. > > But it is possible. Just forget about running any DE. Or running a window manager, etc. Had no problems converting to sysvinit with a terminal only system. First thing I did. I always start my installs that way and build from there. Lighter, faster, more efficient system without all the crud that comes with a general DE install. > > > Even trying to install something that has no systemd dependency at all > > depends on something, that depends on something else, etc. that has a > > systemd dependency. And systemd gets reinstalled. > > apt install something systemd- > > Works wonders in cases such as this. Tried that and a couple variations, too. Resulted in that particular part of the install stopping or failing due to "missing dependencies" or some such error. B
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:52:15 -0400 Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:32:14AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote: > > To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and > > numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has > > become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully > > convert to systvinit. > > If you specify "... on a desktop system", then maybe you're correct. > > For most servers, it shouldn't be an issue. The subject _was_ about desktops, MATE specifically, not servers. However, my trials with Buster was from a year ago. And I haven't tried a sysvinit install with it since. Perhaps some systemd dependencies have been eliminated. Be great if they all were! Init systems should never ever be dependencies. B
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 03:41:41PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote: > Reco wrote: > > > To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and > > > numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has > > > become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully > > > convert to systvinit. > > > > But it is possible. Just forget about running any DE. > > XFCE works. I stand corrected. > Probably LXDE, though I haven't checked. I did, as I use the thing every day. lxsession has policykit dependency (can be replaced by xinit though). Other than that LXDE stays mostly systemd-free (as of buster). Reco
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
Reco wrote: > > To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and > > numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has > > become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully > > convert to systvinit. > > But it is possible. Just forget about running any DE. XFCE works. Probably LXDE, though I haven't checked. -dsr-
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
Hi. On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:32:14AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote: > dbus, which is an xorg dependency, Not in buster: # apt policy dbus dbus: Installed: (none) Candidate: 1.12.20-0+deb10u1 Version table: 1.12.20-0+deb10u1 500 500 http://ftp.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 Packages # apt policy xserver-xorg xserver-xorg: Installed: 1:7.7+19 Candidate: 1:7.7+19 Version table: *** 1:7.7+19 500 500 http://ftp.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status > but it itself has a systemd dependency. Not in buster, again: # apt policy dbus dbus: Installed: 1.12.20-0+deb10u1 Candidate: 1.12.20-0+deb10u1 Version table: *** 1.12.20-0+deb10u1 500 500 http://ftp.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status # apt policy systemd systemd: Installed: (none) Candidate: 241-7~deb10u4 Version table: 241-7~deb10u4 500 500 http://ftp.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 Packages > To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and > numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has > become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully > convert to systvinit. But it is possible. Just forget about running any DE. > Even trying to install something that has no systemd dependency at all > depends on something, that depends on something else, etc. that has a > systemd dependency. And systemd gets reinstalled. apt install something systemd- Works wonders in cases such as this. Reco
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:32:14AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote: > To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and > numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has > become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully > convert to systvinit. If you specify "... on a desktop system", then maybe you're correct. For most servers, it shouldn't be an issue.
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
On Tue, 15 Sep 2020 19:28:34 -0700 Marc Shapiro wrote: > I have a fresh install of Buster which is running MATE as the Desktop > Environment. It has taken me until now to get it working, without > messing up my current Stretch install on the same machine. The next > thing that I want to do is replace systemd with sysvinit. I am not > trying to start a flamewar about which is better. I want sysvinit, not > systemd, let's leave it at that. > > I ran 'aptitude install sysvinit-core'. This resulted in about 2 dozen > [snip] > > > So, my question is: Can I replace systemd with sysvint and still keep > MATE? Do I need to let aptitude uninstall MATE, and then reinstall > after sysvinit has been installed? Or have MATE and the GIMP been > updated in a way that requires systemd and not sysvinit? Short answer? Probably not. systemd has become too pervasive a dependency to do so. It shouldn't be. No other init system I know of is. > If it is possible to do what I want, what is the easiest way to > accomplish it? Last year, I tried to install Buster with sysvinit as I had done previously with Stretch. I started with a basic terminal install. (Ultimately intending to have Openbox window manager and a single lxpanel for my GUI as I had done with Stretch.) I converted Buster to sysvinit with no problems. It rebooted and all looked fine until I tried to install xorg. I noted that sysvinit would be uninstalled and systemd reinstalled. I still had all the systemd libraries. They hadn't been removed. And I wasn't trying to created a systemd-less system. Even trying a minimal xorg install resulted in the same problem. The culprit? dbus, which is an xorg dependency, but it itself has a systemd dependency. To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully convert to systvinit. Even trying to install something that has no systemd dependency at all depends on something, that depends on something else, etc. that has a systemd dependency. And systemd gets reinstalled. I think to do what you want to do with Buster will require a complete recompile from source removing all systemd dependencies. My solution? Devuan Beowulf(Buster). All systemd dependencies have been removed, etc. Sysvinit runs just fine. It's the default. You even have the option to use Openrc as an init, but it's still listed as "experimental." Good Luck. B
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 19:28:34 -0700, Marc Shapiro wrote: > I have a fresh install of Buster which is running MATE as the Desktop > Environment. […] The next thing that I > want to do is replace systemd with sysvinit. > > Now I get a full screen of packages to be removed. Most are libraries, and > what seem to be MATE virtual packages, along with some other packages, > including the GIMP. I DO want MATE and the GIMP. This looks like a > problem. The problem with MATE is that many MATE packages depend on mate-polkit, which depends on policykit-1, which in buster depends on libpam-systemd. In Bullseye this dependency is changed to the new virtual package logind, which can be provided by either systemd or elogind. There may be other packages pulling in systemd. Using MATE without any logind backend does mostly work, but you'll miss things like auto-mounting drives etc. Until bullseye becomes stable, you could maybe try to trick apt into accepting elogind, by creating your own 'libpam-system', 'libsystemd0' packages that just pull in the elogind counterparts. This may however have unintended side-effects if something genuinely depends on systemd specifically. There's also an old bug about this: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=909192 ~~ Nito
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
Looking at the Wikipedia entry for Devuan - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devuan - it appears that the folks over there have had to modify precisely udisks2 and policykit. This is not a Devuan support list - but it looks as if stock Debian may not allow the switch once a full system is installed. If you were to install only a minimum, text-only system, switch to sysvinit and then use tasksel to add the MATE desktop environment, it might then work but there's no guarantee unless you try this. All the very best, as ever, Andy C. On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 12:30 PM Reco wrote: > Hi. > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 07:28:34PM -0700, Marc Shapiro wrote: > > So, my question is: Can I replace systemd with sysvint and still keep > MATE? > > Exibit 1 (mate-core and systemd-sysv are installed): > > # apt install sysvinit-core systemd- > ... > The following packages will be REMOVED: > caja dbus-user-session gvfs gvfs-backends gvfs-daemons libpam-systemd > ... > systemd systemd-sysv udisks2 > The following NEW packages will be installed: > initscripts insserv startpar sysv-rc sysvinit-core > > Exibit 2: > > # apt install sysvinit-core systemd- udisks2 > ... > udisks2 : Depends: libpam-systemd but it is not going to be installed > > > Exibit 3: > > # apt install sysvinit-core systemd- policykit-1 > ... > The following packages have unmet dependencies: > policykit-1 : Depends: libpam-systemd but it is not going to be installed > > > So, to answer your question. It may be possible to keep assorted MATE > programs (text editor, terminal, etc) and have sysvinit-core installed. > But everything that makes MATE the DE (i.e. file manager, panel, > session, etc) is tied to either udisks2 or policykit, and you cannot > keep those (both require libpam-systemd) and have sysvinit-sysv. > > Even if you cheat it with equivs, and create a replacement package > for libpam-systemd, both udisks2 or policykit - you'll just break those > and leave yourself with non-mounting storage media and without the > ability to suspend and poweroff. > > Reco > >
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
Hi. On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 07:28:34PM -0700, Marc Shapiro wrote: > So, my question is: Can I replace systemd with sysvint and still keep MATE? Exibit 1 (mate-core and systemd-sysv are installed): # apt install sysvinit-core systemd- ... The following packages will be REMOVED: caja dbus-user-session gvfs gvfs-backends gvfs-daemons libpam-systemd ... systemd systemd-sysv udisks2 The following NEW packages will be installed: initscripts insserv startpar sysv-rc sysvinit-core Exibit 2: # apt install sysvinit-core systemd- udisks2 ... udisks2 : Depends: libpam-systemd but it is not going to be installed Exibit 3: # apt install sysvinit-core systemd- policykit-1 ... The following packages have unmet dependencies: policykit-1 : Depends: libpam-systemd but it is not going to be installed So, to answer your question. It may be possible to keep assorted MATE programs (text editor, terminal, etc) and have sysvinit-core installed. But everything that makes MATE the DE (i.e. file manager, panel, session, etc) is tied to either udisks2 or policykit, and you cannot keep those (both require libpam-systemd) and have sysvinit-sysv. Even if you cheat it with equivs, and create a replacement package for libpam-systemd, both udisks2 or policykit - you'll just break those and leave yourself with non-mounting storage media and without the ability to suspend and poweroff. Reco
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
On Ma, 15 sep 20, 19:28:34, Marc Shapiro wrote: > > I ran 'aptitude install sysvinit-core'. This resulted in about 2 dozen > packages to be removed (some of which, I would have removed anyway) and a > similar number with unmet dependencies (mostly recommends). I can live with > that and work around any issues once I'm running on sysvinit, so I accept > the option. Try installing libpam-elogind as well. Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 07:28:34PM -0700, Marc Shapiro wrote: > I want sysvinit, not systemd Should be easy. > I ran 'aptitude install sysvinit-core'. > This gives me another screen full of text [...] > Now I get a full screen of packages to be removed. [...] I think the basic problem here is that you used aptitude instead of apt-get. Aptitude is probably not very well tested for this switch-over, and seems to be trying to out-clever itself. Just use "apt-get install sysvinit-core" like the bot factoid says.
Re: Buster with MATE without systemd
Marc Shapiro wrote: ... > If it is possible to do what I want, what is the easiest way to > accomplish it? i haven't tried that as i'm ok with what i have going but i'll be interested in what you find out. can you clone your current partition and then try it out and if it doesn't work then you could restore it? songbird
