Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[John Hughes]

On 21/12/15 12:41, Rowland Penny wrote:

On 21/12/15 11:06, John Hughes wrote:

On 21/12/15 11:52, Rowland Penny wrote:

On 21/12/15 10:03, John Hughes wrote:



What I'm looking for is choice -- I want people who want systemd to 
be able to run it, and people who dont want it to be able to use 
sysvinit, openrc or upstart or whatever.  At the moment things are 
all fucked up because there is no long term alternative to the seat 
management part of systemd and few people seem prepared to work on it.




This is what people have been trying to get through to you, if you 
run debain jessie, you 'HAVE' to use systemd whether you want to or 
not.


No, you don't.  You do have to have systemd installed, [ see below 
for why ], but systemd does not have to be pid 1.


OK, systemd doesn't have to be pid1, but by your admission, you still 
have to have it installed *even* if you don't want to, this is *not* 
choice!


Having a few files and directories on your disk is a major problem? 
systemd is not running if you're using systemd-shim, it just needs the 
systemd directories (that's why systemd-shim depends on systemd -- I 
suppose it would be possible to break the systemd package up into 
"systemd-config" and "systemd-binaries", but what would be the point?)




I can understand why parts of the desktop rely on something like 
udev, but this has now been subsumed by systemd.


No it hasn't.  The source code for udev is in the same tree as 
systemd, and they share some library functions, but udev still works 
without systemd.


Can you explain how? if you try to download the source package for 
udev, you will get the systemd source package.


So?   Who the hell cares?  Just build udev, there is source for some 
other things in the tree, ignore 'em.  When udev is running it does not 
need systemd.






If systemd had just been a replacement for sysv or upstart etc, then 
there would not have been all the row about it, those that wanted to 
use it could have and those that didn't, didn't have to, but no, 
because of the way it is taking over the established way of doing 
things, you are denied the free choice of what init system to use!


Assumes facts not in evidence.


Only because you seem to be ignoring the evidence, try setting up a 
debian jessie system with a gui. Now open a terminal as root and run 
'apt-get purge systemd* -y'


Why would you do that?  You've just broken your system.

Surely you care about what software is running, not what the package 
names or filenames are.


If you want to run an init system other than systemd the way to do it is:

Install your new init system, install systemd-shim, remove 
systemd-sysv.  Your fathers brother is called Robert.


___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[Rowland Penny]

On 21/12/15 13:40, John Hughes wrote:

On 21/12/15 12:41, Rowland Penny wrote:

On 21/12/15 11:06, John Hughes wrote:

On 21/12/15 11:52, Rowland Penny wrote:

On 21/12/15 10:03, John Hughes wrote:



What I'm looking for is choice -- I want people who want systemd 
to be able to run it, and people who dont want it to be able to 
use sysvinit, openrc or upstart or whatever.  At the moment things 
are all fucked up because there is no long term alternative to the 
seat management part of systemd and few people seem prepared to 
work on it.




This is what people have been trying to get through to you, if you 
run debain jessie, you 'HAVE' to use systemd whether you want to or 
not.


No, you don't.  You do have to have systemd installed, [ see below 
for why ], but systemd does not have to be pid 1.


OK, systemd doesn't have to be pid1, but by your admission, you still 
have to have it installed *even* if you don't want to, this is *not* 
choice!


Having a few files and directories on your disk is a major problem? 
systemd is not running if you're using systemd-shim, it just needs the 
systemd directories (that's why systemd-shim depends on systemd -- I 
suppose it would be possible to break the systemd package up into 
"systemd-config" and "systemd-binaries", but what would be the point?)




I can understand why parts of the desktop rely on something like 
udev, but this has now been subsumed by systemd.


No it hasn't.  The source code for udev is in the same tree as 
systemd, and they share some library functions, but udev still works 
without systemd.


Can you explain how? if you try to download the source package for 
udev, you will get the systemd source package.


So?   Who the hell cares?  Just build udev, there is source for some 
other things in the tree, ignore 'em.  When udev is running it does 
not need systemd.






If systemd had just been a replacement for sysv or upstart etc, 
then there would not have been all the row about it, those that 
wanted to use it could have and those that didn't, didn't have to, 
but no, because of the way it is taking over the established way of 
doing things, you are denied the free choice of what init system to 
use!


Assumes facts not in evidence.


Only because you seem to be ignoring the evidence, try setting up a 
debian jessie system with a gui. Now open a terminal as root and run 
'apt-get purge systemd* -y'


Why would you do that?  You've just broken your system.


Exactly you moron.



Surely you care about what software is running, not what the package 
names or filenames are.


If you want to run an init system other than systemd the way to do it is:

Install your new init system, install systemd-shim, remove 
systemd-sysv.  Your fathers brother is called Robert.




Wrong on two counts there, run devuan, you don't need systemd at all and 
my fathers brother was called Walter, Robert was my father :-)


I think you will find that most of the people here, do not want any part 
of systemd on their computers, me included, hence the use of Devuan 
instead of debian.


Now I have said this before but you seem to be hard of hearing, so *GO 
AWAY, YOU ARE PREACHING TO THE CONVERTED HERE!*


Rowland



___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[KatolaZ]

On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 03:07:14PM +0100, John Hughes wrote:

[cut]

> 
> I had hopes for Devuan, but the lack of rational thinking convinces
> me that it's going nowhere.
> 
> Bye.
> 

OK, bye now. And please everybody, just stop to answer to those
emails.

-- 
[ Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ --- GLUG Catania -- Freaknet Medialab ]
[ me [at] katolaz.homeunix.net -- http://katolaz.homeunix.net -- ]
[ GNU/Linux User:#325780/ICQ UIN: #258332181/GPG key ID 0B5F062F ]
[ Fingerprint: 8E59 D6AA 445E FDB4 A153 3D5A 5F20 B3AE 0B5F 062F ]
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[John Hughes]

On 20/12/15 19:01, Rainer Weikusat wrote:

John Hughes  writes:

On 19/12/15 11:58, dev1fanboy wrote:

Gnome

If you need more: apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l

We're going round in circles.  *I* posted that command:

https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20151218.143549.77d859b4.en.html

But you still haven't said *why* you want to remove libsystemd0.

This is entirely the wrong question. There's presently no 'libsystemd0'
on my system. Why should it be added?


Joke answer, to let you run systemd?

What I'm looking for is choice -- I want people who want systemd to be 
able to run it, and people who dont want it to be able to use sysvinit, 
openrc or upstart or whatever.  At the moment things are all fucked up 
because there is no long term alternative to the seat management part of 
systemd and few people seem prepared to work on it.

___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[Rowland Penny]

On 21/12/15 10:03, John Hughes wrote:

On 20/12/15 19:01, Rainer Weikusat wrote:

John Hughes  writes:

On 19/12/15 11:58, dev1fanboy wrote:

Gnome

If you need more: apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l

We're going round in circles.  *I* posted that command:

https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20151218.143549.77d859b4.en.html

But you still haven't said *why* you want to remove libsystemd0.

This is entirely the wrong question. There's presently no 'libsystemd0'
on my system. Why should it be added?


Joke answer, to let you run systemd?

What I'm looking for is choice -- I want people who want systemd to be 
able to run it, and people who dont want it to be able to use 
sysvinit, openrc or upstart or whatever.  At the moment things are all 
fucked up because there is no long term alternative to the seat 
management part of systemd and few people seem prepared to work on it.

___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng


This is what people have been trying to get through to you, if you run 
debain jessie, you 'HAVE' to use systemd whether you want to or not. 
Systemd seems to insist on controlling everything and will not tolerate 
any other init system, if you don't want to use systemd but do want to 
to use gnome3, well tough, you cannot. Can you answer why a desktop 
relies on an init system, because I cannot. I can understand why parts 
of the desktop rely on something like udev, but this has now been 
subsumed by systemd. If systemd had just been a replacement for sysv or 
upstart etc, then there would not have been all the row about it, those 
that wanted to use it could have and those that didn't, didn't have to, 
but no, because of the way it is taking over the established way of 
doing things, you are denied the free choice of what init system to use! 
It is LPs way or no way, and the number of things he has broken and 
refused to fix, well it is just arrogance on his part.


 Rowland
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[John Hughes]

On 21/12/15 11:52, Rowland Penny wrote:

On 21/12/15 10:03, John Hughes wrote:



What I'm looking for is choice -- I want people who want systemd to 
be able to run it, and people who dont want it to be able to use 
sysvinit, openrc or upstart or whatever.  At the moment things are 
all fucked up because there is no long term alternative to the seat 
management part of systemd and few people seem prepared to work on it.

___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng


This is what people have been trying to get through to you, if you run 
debain jessie, you 'HAVE' to use systemd whether you want to or not.


No, you don't.  You do have to have systemd installed, and I'm not sure 
why, but systemd does not have to be pid 1.



Can you answer why a desktop relies on an init system, because I cannot.


Because systemd (or systemd-shim) does session management, and Gnome 
didn't want to keep doing it (badly) themselves.


I can understand why parts of the desktop rely on something like udev, 
but this has now been subsumed by systemd.


No it hasn't.  The source code for udev is in the same tree as systemd, 
and they share some library functions, but udev still works without systemd.


If systemd had just been a replacement for sysv or upstart etc, then 
there would not have been all the row about it, those that wanted to 
use it could have and those that didn't, didn't have to, but no, 
because of the way it is taking over the established way of doing 
things, you are denied the free choice of what init system to use!


Assumes facts not in evidence.

___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[Dragan FOSS]

On 12/21/2015 11:03 AM, John Hughes wrote:

At the moment things are all fucked up because there is no long term
alternative to the seat management part of systemd and few people seem
prepared to work on it.


Utterly false claim...systemd is responsible for broken things.
---
1) TRIOS

[dragan@trios][~/Desktop]$ lsb_release -a
No LSB modules are available.
Distributor ID: Trios
Description:Trios GNU/Linux testing
Release:testing
Codename:   mia
[dragan@trios][~/Desktop]$ ck-list-sessions
Session2:
unix-user = '1000'
realname = 'Dragan'
seat = 'Seat1'
session-type = ''
active = TRUE
x11-display = ':0'
x11-display-device = '/dev/tty7'
display-device = ''
remote-host-name = ''
is-local = TRUE
on-since = ':33:30.645278Z'
login-session-id = '1'
[dragan@trios][~/Desktop]$

2) OpenIndiana

dragan@oi:~$ pkg info kernel
  Name: system/kernel
   Summary: Core Solaris Kernel
   Description: core kernel software for a specific instruction-set 
architecture

  Category: System/Core
 State: Installed
 Publisher: openindiana.org
   Version: 0.5.11
Branch: 2015.0.2.15268
Packaging Date: October  5, 2015 04:27:57 PM
  Size: 41.80 MB
  FMRI: 
pkg://openindiana.org/system/kernel@0.5.11-2015.0.2.15268:20151005T162757Z

dragan@oi:~$ ck-list-sessions
Session1:
unix-user = '101'
realname = 'Dragan'
seat = 'StaticSeat1'
session-type = ''
display-type = 'Local'
open = 'TRUE'
active = 'TRUE'
x11-display = ':0'
x11-display-device = '/dev/vt/2'
display-device = '   ?   '
remote-host-name = ''
is-local = 'TRUE'
on-since = 'x:36.874924Z'
login-session-id = ''
idle-since-hint = ''
--

So .. fuck the systemd :)
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[Didier Kryn]

Le 21/12/2015 11:03, John Hughes a écrit :
What I'm looking for is choice -- I want people who want systemd to be 
able to run it, and people who dont want it to be able to use 
sysvinit, openrc or upstart or whatever.


Please stop this. This question has been answered a million times 
already. There is Devuan with Systemd: it's called Debian. Full stop.


___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[Rowland Penny]

On 21/12/15 11:06, John Hughes wrote:

On 21/12/15 11:52, Rowland Penny wrote:

On 21/12/15 10:03, John Hughes wrote:



What I'm looking for is choice -- I want people who want systemd to 
be able to run it, and people who dont want it to be able to use 
sysvinit, openrc or upstart or whatever.  At the moment things are 
all fucked up because there is no long term alternative to the seat 
management part of systemd and few people seem prepared to work on it.

___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng


This is what people have been trying to get through to you, if you 
run debain jessie, you 'HAVE' to use systemd whether you want to or not.


No, you don't.  You do have to have systemd installed, and I'm not 
sure why, but systemd does not have to be pid 1.


OK, systemd doesn't have to be pid1, but by your admission, you still 
have to have it installed *even* if you don't want to, this is *not* choice!





Can you answer why a desktop relies on an init system, because I cannot.


Because systemd (or systemd-shim) does session management, and Gnome 
didn't want to keep doing it (badly) themselves.


There are other ways of doing session management (actually I couldn't 
give a flying fig if Gnome3 relies on systemd, I hate that mess as well)




I can understand why parts of the desktop rely on something like 
udev, but this has now been subsumed by systemd.


No it hasn't.  The source code for udev is in the same tree as 
systemd, and they share some library functions, but udev still works 
without systemd.


Can you explain how? if you try to download the source package for udev, 
you will get the systemd source package.




If systemd had just been a replacement for sysv or upstart etc, then 
there would not have been all the row about it, those that wanted to 
use it could have and those that didn't, didn't have to, but no, 
because of the way it is taking over the established way of doing 
things, you are denied the free choice of what init system to use!


Assumes facts not in evidence.


Only because you seem to be ignoring the evidence, try setting up a 
debian jessie system with a gui. Now open a terminal as root and run 
'apt-get purge systemd* -y'


Just how much of your install will you have left?

Rowland




___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng


___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[Dr. Nikolaus Klepp]

Am Montag, 21. Dezember 2015 schrieb John Hughes:
> On 21/12/15 11:52, Rowland Penny wrote:
> > On 21/12/15 10:03, John Hughes wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> What I'm looking for is choice -- I want people who want systemd to 
> >> be able to run it, and people who dont want it to be able to use 
> >> sysvinit, openrc or upstart or whatever.  At the moment things are 
> >> all fucked up because there is no long term alternative to the seat 
> >> management part of systemd and few people seem prepared to work on it.
> >> ___
> >> Dng mailing list
> >> Dng@lists.dyne.org
> >> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
> >
> > This is what people have been trying to get through to you, if you run 
> > debain jessie, you 'HAVE' to use systemd whether you want to or not.
> 
> No, you don't.  You do have to have systemd installed, and I'm not sure 
> why, but systemd does not have to be pid 1.
> 
> > Can you answer why a desktop relies on an init system, because I cannot.
> 
> Because systemd (or systemd-shim) does session management, and Gnome 
> didn't want to keep doing it (badly) themselves.
> 
> > I can understand why parts of the desktop rely on something like udev, 
> > but this has now been subsumed by systemd.
> 
> No it hasn't.  The source code for udev is in the same tree as systemd, 
> and they share some library functions, but udev still works without systemd.
> 
> > If systemd had just been a replacement for sysv or upstart etc, then 
> > there would not have been all the row about it, those that wanted to 
> > use it could have and those that didn't, didn't have to, but no, 
> > because of the way it is taking over the established way of doing 
> > things, you are denied the free choice of what init system to use!
> 
> Assumes facts not in evidence.

It is hard to ignore your ignorance.

Nik

-- 
Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with 
the NSA.
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[Rainer Weikusat]

John Hughes  writes:
> On 20/12/15 19:01, Rainer Weikusat wrote:
>> John Hughes  writes:
>>> On 19/12/15 11:58, dev1fanboy wrote:
 Gnome

 If you need more: apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l
>>> We're going round in circles.  *I* posted that command:
>>>
>>> https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20151218.143549.77d859b4.en.html
>>>
>>> But you still haven't said *why* you want to remove libsystemd0.
>> This is entirely the wrong question. There's presently no 'libsystemd0'
>> on my system. Why should it be added?
>
> Joke answer, to let you run systemd?

That's the answer I was already aware of.
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[Adam Borowski]

On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 02:40:08PM +0100, John Hughes wrote:
> >>No, you don't.  You do have to have systemd installed, [ see below for
> >>why ], but systemd does not have to be pid 1.
> >
> >OK, systemd doesn't have to be pid1, but by your admission, you still have
> >to have it installed *even* if you don't want to, this is *not* choice!
> 
> Having a few files and directories on your disk is a major problem? systemd
> is not running if you're using systemd-shim, it just needs the systemd
> directories (that's why systemd-shim depends on systemd -- I suppose it
> would be possible to break the systemd package up into "systemd-config" and
> "systemd-binaries", but what would be the point?)

There's far more to systemd than just init.  It's not just empty directories
or config that's needed on a -shim system.  Logind for example.

-- 
A tit a day keeps the vet away.
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[Simon Hobson]

John Hughes  wrote:

> Yes, the impression I get around here is that this is a religious argument 
> for most of you.
> 
> I had hopes for Devuan, but the lack of rational thinking convinces me that 
> it's going nowhere.

There's no lack of rational thinking.
People here don't want to run SystemD, and what's more, we don't want to 
encourage people to add gratuitous dependencies because "it's OK, there'll 
always be a bit of SystemD present". While libsystemd0 may appear harmless, it 
isn't for two reasons :
1) By making it "OK" to have because "it does nothing", it encourages people to 
assume it's presences and use it - rather than actually checking first or just 
not using it if not needed.
2) I don't have the skills to check, and keep checking, that libsystemd is in 
fact "harmless". Just because it doesn't do anything now, doesn't mean that 
tomorrow someone will find that "doing nothing" is inconvenient* and so some 
"does more than nothing" code gets added.

* I'm thinking, someone decides they want to use a systemd function, but finds 
that the call "fails" when systemd isn't installed. So instead of just 
accepting that "if systemd isn't installed, they'll have to do X another way", 
they may well suggest that the functions supporting X are moved from the 
systemd package to libsystemd0 - "it's still OK, it's only a tiny support 
function". And so it goes on, like boiling a frog, until having libsystemd 
installed equates to running significant chunks of systemd itself.

Now, you may consider "doesn't want any part of systemd on my system" as 
religious zeal. It's not, I just don't want stuff that as far as I can tell is 
primarily designed to reduce reliability (in terms of the stuff I run). Not a 
single (claimed) "benefit" of SystemD is actually a benefit for my systems, in 
fact far from it. While I'm not a "programmer", I do know enough about the 
subject to read between the lines of some of it and see just how bad it is.
And yes, I've seen a function implemented while has just one function to cause 
data loss - why else would anyone go to the trouble of making an "async" sync 
call and complain about sync being sync ? It may or may not have been fixed, 
but the very fact of it getting into the project in the first place simply 
shows that the project is run/managed by people who (being generous) simply 
don't have a clue.

I don't want that on my systems.
I *like* text log files.
I *like* shell script init files.
I *like* sequential (deterministic) service startup.
These things have got me out of the brown stuff more than once !

I'm not in the least bothered about shaving a few seconds off the *apparent* 
boot time given that the hardware alone can take minutes before the OS itself 
gets to start.

Like most, iff SystemD was "just an init system" as some of it's supporters 
keep suggesting then no problem. I'd just not install it and carry on. But it 
isn't an init system - it's a Windows style "blob" of all encompassing stuff 
that goes against everything I like in Unix/Unix like systems !

> Bye.

Good bye - please don't come back until you've understood.

___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[Arnt Gulbrandsen]

You sound more and more like a troll.

John Hughes writes:
Having a few files and directories on your disk is a major 
problem? systemd is not running if you're using systemd-shim, it 
just needs the systemd directories


This is a classic fallacy. But each new file in /etc is one more file to 
look at and think about when trying to solve a problem.


https://i-msdn.sec.s-msft.com/dynimg/IC97569.gif is somewhat relevant. 
Ugly, not? That dialog is the result of allowing many unused little 
checkboxes because "what's the cost?".


Arnt

___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[Rainer Weikusat]

John Hughes  writes:
> On 19/12/15 11:58, dev1fanboy wrote:
>> Gnome
>>
>> If you need more: apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l
>
> We're going round in circles.  *I* posted that command:
>
> https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20151218.143549.77d859b4.en.html
>
> But you still haven't said *why* you want to remove libsystemd0.

This is entirely the wrong question. There's presently no 'libsystemd0'
on my system. Why should it be added?
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[John Hughes]

On 18/12/15 19:02, Steve Litt wrote:

Yeah, in an ideal world, we'd like to remove every rotting vestige of
systemd, but in a practical world, where if we don't timely produce
something people can actually use, this has all been for naught,
removal is a process, where on the first go-around we remove systemd as
PID1 and the process supervisor


Then I don't understand what the point of Devuan is -- you can "remove 
systemd as

PID1 and the process supervisor" in Debian.


___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[dev1fanboy]

Reading from devuan.org Devuan intends in the long term to try to 
follow the UNIX philosophy of doing one thing and doing it well, so 
it's not just about systemd.


You have to avoid many other packages to avoid systemd and in some 
cases you will end up with systemd support that you don't want anyway.



 
On Saturday, December 19, 2015 9:38 AM, John Hughes 
 wrote:

 

On 18/12/15 19:02, Steve Litt wrote:
Yeah, in an ideal world, we'd like to remove every rotting vestige 
of

systemd, but in a practical world, where if we don't timely produce
something people can actually use, this has all been for naught,
removal is a process, where on the first go-around we remove systemd 
as

PID1 and the process supervisor
Then I don't understand what the point of Devuan is -- you can 
"remove

systemd as
PID1 and the process supervisor" in Debian.


___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

--
Take back your privacy. Switch to www.StartMail.com
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[John Hughes]

On 19/12/15 11:40, dev1fanboy wrote:


You have to avoid many other packages to avoid systemd and in some 
cases you will end up with systemd support that you don't want anyway.




For example?
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[John Hughes]

On 19/12/15 11:58, dev1fanboy wrote:

Gnome

If you need more: apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l


We're going round in circles.  *I* posted that command:

https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20151218.143549.77d859b4.en.html

But you still haven't said *why* you want to remove libsystemd0.
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[Rowland Penny]

On 19/12/15 11:02, John Hughes wrote:

On 19/12/15 11:58, dev1fanboy wrote:

Gnome

If you need more: apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l


We're going round in circles.  *I* posted that command:

https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20151218.143549.77d859b4.en.html

But you still haven't said *why* you want to remove libsystemd0.


OK, how about this, I have a pathological hatred of systemd and will not 
use it, is that good enough for you ?


Rowland




___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng


___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[dev1fanboy]

Gnome

If you need more: apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l



 
On Saturday, December 19, 2015 10:45 AM, John Hughes 
 wrote:

 

On 19/12/15 11:40, dev1fanboy wrote:
You have to avoid many other packages to avoid systemd and in some 
cases you will end up with systemd support that you don't want 
anyway.

 

For example?

--
Take back your privacy. Switch to www.StartMail.com
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[dev1fanboy]

It still answers your question, and you haven't responded to what I 
said about gnome.


In the previous response you didn't reply to what I said about Devuan 
not being *just* about systemd either.


I think you misunderstand me, I don't want to remove any part of 
systemd. Can you show what I said that gave you this impression?




On Saturday, December 19, 2015 11:02 AM, John Hughes 
 wrote:

 

On 19/12/15 11:58, dev1fanboy wrote:

Gnome

If you need more: apt-cache rdepends libsystemd0 | wc -l

We're going round in circles.  *I* posted that command:


https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20151218.143549.77d859b4.en.html

But you still haven't said *why* you want to remove libsystemd0.

--
Take back your privacy. Switch to www.StartMail.com
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

[DNG] Devuan's goal: was Our friendly community

[Steve Litt]

On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 18:51:02 +0300
Mitt Green  wrote:

> >is nothing but "systemd support code added to some
> >package".  
> 
> If it is so, why there is so much hype about it? 
> I previously thought that Devuan aim was to remove
> *any* of systemd components. 

I think this is settled law, settled on our mailing list many months
ago. Here's how I remember the consensus during that discussion...

Yeah, in an ideal world, we'd like to remove every rotting vestige of
systemd, but in a practical world, where if we don't timely produce
something people can actually use, this has all been for naught,
removal is a process, where on the first go-around we remove systemd as
PID1 and the process supervisor, put it out there, and then, with the
influx of devs and testers that are sure to follow, continue removing
systemd-isms as fast as we can, hopefully someday getting to the point
where we can remove them just weeks after the obfuscationists put
them in.

Does that sound like the goal the rest of you remember?

Thanks,

SteveT

Steve Litt 
November 2015 featured book: Troubleshooting Techniques
 of the Successful Technologist
http://www.troubleshooters.com/techniques
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng