Re: [DNG] Why Debian 8 Pinning is pointless

[Rick Moen]

I'm sorry, it's the middle of the night here, and I shouldn't be 
responding to mail.  I didn't notice that the private copy was a _Cc_,
and otherwise would not have spoken in that tone.  

As is the way of such things, I realised my error a split-second after 
the Send command.

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

Re: [DNG] Why Debian 8 Pinning is pointless

[Rick Moen]

Quoting dev (devua...@gmail.com):

> Sure, why not? 

1.  I notice you curiously dropped off the mailing list into private
mail.  Sorry, I wasn't really interested in a private discussion.

2.  I notice you weren't interested in that wager.

So, just rhetorical overload, as expected.

> Glibc is just an example but the apache common package dependence is
> real.a

And meaningless.

Please don't send me private mail unless we have some actual reason for
a private discussion.  Thank you.

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

Re: [DNG] Why Debian 8 Pinning is pointless

[dev]

On 07/13/2016 01:14 PM, Rick Moen wrote:

'dev' wrote:


> You can pin all you want, and force-remove all you want, but
> one day there will be a package you need (let's pretend it's
> linux-libc-dev-xxx.x.x) which will have the hinge-pin baked-in. You
> can no longer update libc.



Really?  The GNU libc package is going to suffer a dependency chain that
requires package systemd?


Sure, why not? Poettering and Sievers want systemd in the kernel so why 
stop when there's an entire distribution to mess up? Quite sad that it 
had to be Debian; SCO would have been a much better fit especially 
considering the Microsoft backing and the general dbaggery of SCO 
leadership.


Glibc is just an example but the apache common package dependence is 
real. It's been specifically compiled with a systemd dependency simply 
to make the software inoperable when libsystemd0 has been removed. There 
is no reason to have that library compiled into that package and you 
know that.


All things considered, If the only choice left were Debian I would 
likely switch to Windows. Far fewer bugs and less... systemDuctape.



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

Re: [DNG] Why Debian 8 Pinning is pointless

[Jaromil]

On Wed, 13 Jul 2016, Simon Hobson wrote:

> That brings me to something I've been meaning to ask for a while. Is
> there anything practical I can do to help ?

well, besites being one of many nice people that are part of this
community :^) what comes to me in mind is the Distrowatch rating for
Devuan which is pretty good, but doesn't have a sustained rate of
visits. The DW rating is really a community pulse, works by counting
the visits to a distro page from every unique IPs every day.

So if you visit daily this page https://distrowatch.com/devuan and
even set it as homepage on your computers, then this will definitely
help us putting the word out about Devuan. We can always use more
visibility and DW is an excellent avenue for that.

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

Re: [DNG] Why Debian 8 Pinning is pointless

[Edward Bartolo]

Hi,

If my memory serves me right, Debian have removed apt pinning and they
see nothing wrong in making more packages depend on systemd. That is
enough of an indicator to decide in favour of more choice.

Long Life Choice.

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

Re: [DNG] Why Debian 8 Pinning is pointless

[Simon Hobson]

dev  wrote:

> I mention all this becuase I took the "deb 8" pinning challenge today
> and it failed miserably.

I tried something similar not long ago. It "almost" worked except that one 
component of Clamav that the server in question needs has a dependency on 
libsystemd0. The response from the Debian packaging team was "not helpful".

> I have around 40 Ubuntu 12.04 LTS machines in production. They
> all need to be upgraded before April of 2017 when security patches
> become deprecated.  I don't know if Devuan will be 1.0 stable by
> then but completely understand the complexity of the task at hand
> considering the tentacular and insidious reach of systemd. Our
> current plan is to go to 14.04 LTS where there is hopefully a
> minimum of systemd invasion, but any hope for a "Debian" pinning
> solution is certainly lost.

I've somewhat less systems than that, mostly Debian Wheezy - and I have much 
the same situation regarding "supported" status and updates.

> Do not let BS comments like "an operative overreaction" discourage your 
> efforts.


+1



Jaromil  wrote:

> However what I really wanted to say is that you can count on the fact
> Devuan 1.0 will be out and stable well before April 2017.

That's good to hear.

> BTW If there is a company that can step up and support some of the
> work being done with a sponsorship ...

That brings me to something I've been meaning to ask for a while. Is there 
anything practical I can do to help ?

I can't offer anything through work*, or reasonably anything using company 
resources - so I couldn't slip a server in without the bandwidth being noticed. 
And my technical skills aren't that great either, and outside of work I have 
very little spare time due to the "DIY stuff" I have on for the next year or 
two.
When I get sorted (IT wise, at home), I might be able to offer some bandwidth 
from home (mirror ?) - I have a VDSL2 service with about 15Mbps outbound & 
unmetered.
I realise I'm probably no different to anyone else - no time, no money :-(

* I work in a very MS/Windows centric shop - the sort of place where no-one 
sees anything wrong with the "you upgrade when we tell you" approach in Windows 
10, or the data slurping it has built in, or the "opaque black box" it offers 
to sysadmins. The GNU/Linus stuff I run is mostly the support stuff (routers, 
DNS, Mail, Monitoring) and a couple of web servers because they run PHP stuff 
(Wordpress) "easier" than Windows. And all running on hand me downs as the 
Windows guys have upgraded to more grunt to run their bloatware :-)


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

Re: [DNG] Why Debian 8 Pinning is pointless

[Jaromil]

hi there,

thanks for the post. Also many others here and among VUAs have tried
the pinning before proceeding with the debianfork plan and spotted
many limitations. Pinning cannot work for serious production and
long-term use, this was our conclusion. In my eyes anyone saying that
Devuan can be substituted by pinning is either an ignorant on the
matter or a very sadistic systemd hooligan who like to denigrate even
those who left in peace after a poisoned GR vote count.

However what I really wanted to say is that you can count on the fact
Devuan 1.0 will be out and stable well before April 2017. I believe
most developers involved understand this as possible. We may ask more
help and resources if the deadline approaches without progress, but I
really doubt that. We are at a good point already, its just that we
give to the *stable* word a way deeper meaning than what Debian does
nowadays. Helas.

BTW If there is a company that can step up and support some of the
work being done with a sponsorship, between now and October would
really be the good time for making an handshake. Currently standing
plans are that we'll push for a release candidate in September, which
will lead to more announcements and proper visibility for our
sponsors.

ciao

On Wed, 13 Jul 2016, dev wrote:

> I have around 40 Ubuntu 12.04 LTS machines in production. They
> all need to be upgraded before April of 2017 when security patches
> become deprecated.  I don't know if Devuan will be 1.0 stable by
> then but completely understand the complexity of the task at hand
> considering the tentacular and insidious reach of systemd. Our
> current plan is to go to 14.04 LTS where there is hopefully a
> minimum of systemd invasion, but any hope for a "Debian" pinning
> solution is certainly lost.
> 
> As anxious as I am to install Devuan on everything, my users would
> not understand the decision to run beta software in production
> when/if something goes wrong. Here's hoping for a Devuan 1.0 sometime
> soon  and thanks go to those working hard to make
> that happen. Do not let BS comments like "an operative overreaction"
> discourage your efforts.
> 
> ___
> Dng mailing list
> Dng@lists.dyne.org
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

-- 
~.,_   Denis Roio aka Jaromilhttp://Dyne.org think  tank
"+.   CTO and co-founder  free/open source developers
  @)   ⚷ crypto κρυπτο крипто गुप्त् 加密 האנוסים المشفره
@@)  GnuPG: 6113D89C A825C5CE DD02C872 73B35DA5 4ACB7D10
(@@@)  opmsg:73a8e097a038d82b 8afb4c05804bda0d 281b3880fbc19b88


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

[DNG] Why Debian 8 Pinning is pointless

[dev]

*sigh* apologies for the length. It was not what I intended..
tldr: "Go devuan! Debian 8 pinning does not work for me"


I don't have the thread anymore, but there was something posted
within the past couple days which led me to this link -- I think
it was something Steve posted; something about a mailing list thread:

http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Debian/openrc-conversion.html

Someone on the linked thread made a lot of arguments about how
Devuan was "an operative overreaction" in response to Systemd;
about how the same thing could be done with Debian 8 and the apt
pinning workaround.

There are two reasons why this will never work, and the logistics
behind those two reasons are what makes the work being done on
Devuan all the more relevant:

1) Hacking up a distribution which has committed to a systemd
hinge-pin is a nice way to find yourself in a headlock someday.
You can pin all you want, and force-remove all you want, but
one day there will be a package you need (let's pretend it's
linux-libc-dev-xxx.x.x) which will have the hinge-pin baked-in. You
can no longer update libc. By consequence, you can no longer update
anything which depends on libc. Which is like everything.

2) Obviously, some packages are already at that point and already
have dependencies baked into some of the fundamental linux packages
everyone runs on Linux.

Devuan *is* relevant because any systemd bloat which makes it's way
into future packages can be delt with by the Devuan community. Which
is the fundamental idea Linux was built on. The same fundamental
idea which systemd adoption kills. Systemd is vendor lock-in and
there is no other way to explain it when "apache2-common" cannot
be installed due to libsystemd0 dependency.

I mention all this becuase I took the "deb 8" pinning challenge today
and it failed miserably. After following all the pinning directions,
and removing all systemd related software, my deb 8 system boots fine
on openrc, but I cannot use a2enmod as it requires apache2-common
which requires libsystemd0. uh whut??... I put the console session
on patsebin for brevity here: http://pastebin.com/raw/wZkuskuv

I have around 40 Ubuntu 12.04 LTS machines in production. They
all need to be upgraded before April of 2017 when security patches
become deprecated.  I don't know if Devuan will be 1.0 stable by
then but completely understand the complexity of the task at hand
considering the tentacular and insidious reach of systemd. Our
current plan is to go to 14.04 LTS where there is hopefully a
minimum of systemd invasion, but any hope for a "Debian" pinning
solution is certainly lost.

As anxious as I am to install Devuan on everything, my users would
not understand the decision to run beta software in production
when/if something goes wrong. Here's hoping for a Devuan 1.0 sometime
soon  and thanks go to those working hard to make
that happen. Do not let BS comments like "an operative overreaction"
discourage your efforts.

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