Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On 11/28/14 01:13, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Paige Thompson erra...@yourstruly.sx wrote: I think im just going to go to sleep. I really don't care if they drop support for it I'll just make my own ebuild / systemd emulation for whatever I need in spite of it, fork it and call it you can have it when you pry it from my cold dead hands linux. Please don't top-post. That's the spirit. As long as you are willing to do the necessary work, no one can ever force you to use any software. Regards. Sorry I wish Thunderbird would start my cursor at the bottom of the e-mail like its supposed to and I forget sometimes.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Friday 28 Nov 2014 19:03:45 Paige Thompson wrote: On 11/28/14 01:13, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Paige Thompson erra...@yourstruly.sx wrote: I think im just going to go to sleep. I really don't care if they drop support for it I'll just make my own ebuild / systemd emulation for whatever I need in spite of it, fork it and call it you can have it when you pry it from my cold dead hands linux. Please don't top-post. That's the spirit. As long as you are willing to do the necessary work, no one can ever force you to use any software. Regards. Sorry I wish Thunderbird would start my cursor at the bottom of the e-mail like its supposed to and I forget sometimes. I'm convinced that there is a setting somewhere in its preferences to allow you to do just that - automatically. -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On 11/28/2014 02:03 PM, Paige Thompson wrote: Sorry I wish Thunderbird would start my cursor at the bottom of the e-mail like its supposed to and I forget sometimes. Edit - Account Settings - Composition and Addressing Check the thing to quote replies, and select start my reply below...
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Philip Webb purs...@ca.inter.net wrote: Adoption of Systemd by other major distros sb good for Gentoo. Disgruntled Debians, Fedoras, Archies (IIRC they've also adopted it) will have a choice of giving in or moving to Slackware or Gentoo. Many of them may decide the moderate amount of extra work with Gentoo is well worth the freedom to use a more traditional init system as serious programmers, many wb able to offer help to Gentoo development. I wouldn't bet to much on that. One of the most vocal anti-systemd Debian users tried either Gento or Funtoo and reported that installation and maintenance were difficult. Binary distros do make things rather easier, especially if you start to play with USE flags on a source distro.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 3:23 PM, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 11/23/2014 1:07 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: So, don't be surprised if FreeBSD develops something *really* similar (along the lines of the second bullet) to systemd in the future Doesn't matter because: a) it won't be systemd (with all of its warts) b) it won't be written by Lennart and company (so won't have any of that baggage either) I'm a happy sysvinit+sysvrc, upstart, sysvinit+openrc, and systemd user. As far as an init system brings up the OS, starts the daemons that I want, and allows me to troubleshoot failures, I couldn't care less what init system's controlling boot. I therefore find anti-systemd posts like this one puzzling, and even surreal, since the people making them are theoretically technical, and therefore logical. Lennart made some design choices that I wish that he hadn't made but I'm not losing any sleep over this; and I don't understand why anyone else should.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 11/23/2014 3:23 PM, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: Also, I'll wager it likely won't be implemented in such a way as to be perceived by its user base as being shoved down their throats. Clarification - this reference was actually to the way Debian is handling it, not Gentoo - I have no problems whatsoever with the way gentoo is handling systemd ... right now at least... Gentoo has the advantage of being source-based and allowing 'USE=... -systemd ...'. If the Debianites opposed to using systemd were willing to systemd-shim and cgmanager, they wouldn't be feeling forced.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 11:53 PM, Gevisz gev...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 21:05:16 + Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 20:25:22 +0200, Gevisz wrote: I switched from Ubuntu 10.04 to Gentoo just because it forced closing window button x to the upper-left corner of the window in Unity of Ubuntu 12.04 while I used to look for it in the upper-right corner. :) Wouldn't it have been easier to use the simple configuration option to move the button back to where you expected it? Far less effort than switching distros. No. It is not possible in Unity or, at least, it was not possible in Unity at the time when Ubuntu 12.04 was released. They really *forced* their users to accept the new place of the closing window frame button and have argued that it is more ergonomic. It was possible with gconf-editor.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
Am 27.11.2014 um 12:00 schrieb Tom H: I wouldn't bet to much on that. One of the most vocal anti-systemd Debian users tried either Gento or Funtoo and reported that installation and maintenance were difficult. Binary distros do make things rather easier, especially if you start to play with USE flags on a source distro. Of course they did. Installing Debian or let's say Ubuntu or Linux Mint is a nobrainer, a streamlined, fast quick and convenient experience, even on most legacy hardware you're done under one hour. Installing Gentoo forces you to think about stuff and know stuff you don't need to know when e.g. using Ubuntu. The Gentoo way equivalent to such distributions is Sabayon: comes with a fully fledged installer (the same like Fedora btw), precompiled binaries and installing doesn't take long. Gentoo is more likely your thing if you want to master your hardware or have quite much knowledge about it. The rest uses other stuff.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
Am 27.11.2014 um 15:21 schrieb Tom H: Lennart made some design choices that I wish that he hadn't made but I'm not losing any sleep over this; and I don't understand why anyone else should. Three frequently brought up issues: 1. Lennart Poettering does not exactly have a track record of making excellent software, more likely making banana software and if he loses interest in his project, hopefully someone will take over. Though him stepping back from Systemd would not be a big issue, because Red Hat does endorse and support it and for sure would find someone else to step up. Excellent software though is another cup of coffee, many just don't want to have his stuff being responsible for booting up their system because of his track record and personal attitude he shows at some conferences and is being held up against him quite frequently. (For example stuff like this here should not happen: https://plus.google.com/+TheodoreTso/posts/4W6rrMMvhWU) 2. The Red Hat wants to take over all other Linux distributions, then squash them and Systemd it their trojan horse. 3. Systemd just got way too big and complicated for the taste of many techies, also usurping the development of other key components which in former times where independent (think about udev, there's a reason for why the eudev-fork came into existance). This and Systemd becoming a hard dependancy for important software packages.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 8:43 AM, Marc Stuermer m...@marc-stuermer.de wrote: Am 27.11.2014 um 12:00 schrieb Tom H: I wouldn't bet to much on that. One of the most vocal anti-systemd Debian users tried either Gento or Funtoo and reported that installation and maintenance were difficult. Binary distros do make things rather easier, especially if you start to play with USE flags on a source distro. Of course they did. Installing Debian or let's say Ubuntu or Linux Mint is a nobrainer, a streamlined, fast quick and convenient experience, even on most legacy hardware you're done under one hour. Installing Gentoo forces you to think about stuff and know stuff you don't need to know when e.g. using Ubuntu. The Gentoo way equivalent to such distributions is Sabayon: comes with a fully fledged installer (the same like Fedora btw), precompiled binaries and installing doesn't take long. And Sabayon uses systemd, of course. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
Am 27.11.2014 um 16:22 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés: And Sabayon uses systemd, of course. Holy moly... never noticed that this happened.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Marc Stürmer m...@marc-stuermer.de wrote: Am 27.11.2014 um 16:22 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés: And Sabayon uses systemd, of course. Holy moly... never noticed that this happened. Sabayon started rolling systemd in April 15, 2013[1]. By Sabayon 14.01, it was the default init[2]. They are in the process of dropping out support for OpenRC entirely [3]. It sounds really cool Sabayon, I should probably try it one of these days. Regards. [1] http://lxnay.wordpress.com/2013/04/15/rolling-out-systemd/ [2] http://www.sabayon.org/release/press-release-oh-oh-oh-sabayon-1401 [3] https://plus.google.com/u/0/+FabioErculiani/posts/1oLt6mT9r7r -- Canek Peláez Valdés Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
so we pretty much established that dropping openrc isn't in the plans for gentoo right? Probably gonna be an option like bootloaders right? On 11/27/14 21:46, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Marc Stürmer m...@marc-stuermer.de wrote: Am 27.11.2014 um 16:22 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés: And Sabayon uses systemd, of course. Holy moly... never noticed that this happened. Sabayon started rolling systemd in April 15, 2013[1]. By Sabayon 14.01, it was the default init[2]. They are in the process of dropping out support for OpenRC entirely [3]. It sounds really cool Sabayon, I should probably try it one of these days. Regards. [1] http://lxnay.wordpress.com/2013/04/15/rolling-out-systemd/ [2] http://www.sabayon.org/release/press-release-oh-oh-oh-sabayon-1401 [3] https://plus.google.com/u/0/+FabioErculiani/posts/1oLt6mT9r7r
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
I think im just going to go to sleep. I really don't care if they drop support for it I'll just make my own ebuild / systemd emulation for whatever I need in spite of it, fork it and call it you can have it when you pry it from my cold dead hands linux. good night -Paige On 11/27/14 22:56, Paige Thompson wrote: so we pretty much established that dropping openrc isn't in the plans for gentoo right? Probably gonna be an option like bootloaders right? On 11/27/14 21:46, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Marc Stürmer m...@marc-stuermer.de wrote: Am 27.11.2014 um 16:22 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés: And Sabayon uses systemd, of course. Holy moly... never noticed that this happened. Sabayon started rolling systemd in April 15, 2013[1]. By Sabayon 14.01, it was the default init[2]. They are in the process of dropping out support for OpenRC entirely [3]. It sounds really cool Sabayon, I should probably try it one of these days. Regards. [1] http://lxnay.wordpress.com/2013/04/15/rolling-out-systemd/ [2] http://www.sabayon.org/release/press-release-oh-oh-oh-sabayon-1401 [3] https://plus.google.com/u/0/+FabioErculiani/posts/1oLt6mT9r7r
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Paige Thompson erra...@yourstruly.sx wrote: I think im just going to go to sleep. I really don't care if they drop support for it I'll just make my own ebuild / systemd emulation for whatever I need in spite of it, fork it and call it you can have it when you pry it from my cold dead hands linux. Please don't top-post. That's the spirit. As long as you are willing to do the necessary work, no one can ever force you to use any software. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 08:45:31 +0100 Marc Stürmer m...@marc-stuermer.de wrote: Am 25.11.2014 um 18:44 schrieb Gevisz: It usually took me from 10 to 20 minutes to download my daily updates in Ubuntu. For big packages - about 40 minutes or even more. That's the time saving aspect lol :) Not lol, it is like I told you. Binary distributions are a big, big time saver compared to a rolling update source based meta distribution like Gentoo. Another reason why many stick with Distros like e.g. Debian, SuSE or Ubuntu is: * you got a standardized environment/system. That's also a very big requirement if using it in a corporate environment, if not the most important one. I do agree with you concerning the corporate environment. Moreover, if I had to maintain a dozen or more *different* computers for other users, I would prefer to use some binary distro with a standardized environment than to set up a custom configuration (including the kernel options) for each of them and then compile everything on each computer. However, I do prefer to setup every possible option for my convenience and compile everything for the better performance on my personal computer. And for a personal use and not super fast connection to the Internet, spending time for downloading updates every day is indeed annoying. Moreover, if I had to maintain computers for *other* users, I would not mind to upgrade their binary distributions every 2 or, better, every 5 years even if *their* working environment would every time change from Gnome2 to Unity and then back to Gnome3. Especially, if it is not my duty to retrain them for this new environment. :) But for myself, I would prefer that my desktop interface would change as little as possible, and only in the direction I want. :) I am not saying that this is not doable with Gentoo, but to achieve it with Gentoo you've got to implement quite some things. For Debian e.g. it comes free out of the box.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On 25/11/14 23:35, Emanuele Rusconi wrote: On 25 November 2014 at 23:42, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: The point was that it could be changed. […] […] It's about as on-topic and relevant as WinXP. No, the point was that sometimes even a small annoyance is plenty enough to drive people away. Let ma add a me too I was quite happy on ubuntu with gnome2 and compiz on the desktop then unity came along with the sidebar that you couldn't move/hide and a semi broken compiz so i moved to bodhi and jeff had really done well to create it but importantly i had my desktop cube back then bodhi 2 with the new version of enlightenment and i lost my compiz cube i could live with the loss of the 3d cube because enlightenment is awesome but then i tried update my system and sadly jeff had slipped with the update of the distro, and because it is esentially ubuntu i thought no bother, here we go. it _sort of_ worked so i tried gnome3 on a live disk and omg even less configurable when that came out without about 100 extra utils that some work for some version and others for another yeah i've no time for that so i thought look, i have gentoo on all servers why the big headache with gentoo on the desktop? i already knew loads about X and session management etc but all of this was useless to me, all i needed was gentoo and an enlightenment overlay and i was 90% there in short: the power of linux is that mostly data and programs are very separated and it is very easy to jump ship when you lose features. also long term release jumps do not upgrade well. I can tell you more stories of having to reinstall over the top every five years and then apt-get install $fromsavedfile The point was that when you feel that the distro you're using takes a direction that doesn't fit you, you look for alternatives. And that's perfectly on-topic. What's off-topic is to figure out if the damn buttons could actually be moved or not. -- Emanuele Rusconi
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On 24/11/14 19:13, Marc Stürmer wrote: Am 24.11.2014 um 19:25 schrieb Gevisz: I switched from Ubuntu 10.04 to Gentoo just because it forced closing window button x to the upper-left corner of the window in Unity of Ubuntu 12.04 while I used to look for it in the upper-right corner. :) So, I see no reason that those that hate systemd would not do the same. I also did for my own server. But the real strength and home of Debian on a server is in the corporate environment, and in a CE you are facing other challenges, namely: * long term support (meaning for a few years), I'd clarify this even more to say almost transparent to install upgrades within that release cycle * stable releases with a more or less stable and predictable release cycle, debatable - i would suggest better tested than stable otherwise there would be no need for debian bugzilla * steady stream of security updates as long as the release is being supported. Which also explains why in that field so many people are so heavily against SystemD, because it is still: * quite a young software project, which needs more time to mature in their eyes, * still a fast moving target, with adding more features over features with every new release, * maybe also the philosophical aspect that it violates one of the primary paradigms of UNIX: do one thing only and do that well, * and it forces them to learn a new way to configure their system, if they would use it. +1 for all of these I disagree: the downloading all that crap also takes a lot of time. Downloading binaries takes of course some time, yes. But downloading e.g. the source code of Chromium compared to the binary of Chromium does take a multiply longer. And after the download of the binary you just need to unpack it and are ready to run it, on Gentoo you need to compile it. I would argue the opposite. I would say that because of the portage binary features, and the possibility an upgrade may not even compile it forces me to do better QA on updates. as an example, I would be less likely to test and update in debian or red hat before applying a series of necessary updates. on gentoo cluster i would install off the cluster first, ensure everything went smooth then distribute the binaries. for issues with conf changes *cough ISC bind and freeradius cough* it means that i'm well prepared. it also means that continuous kernel configuration changes for the various udev updates can be masked and prepared for in a better way than oh this week's updates require i reboot the server good luck using custom kernel or initram with the major distros -- i found that that was a surefire method to bork things, non bootable and confused app-manager both at the same time. So binaries are by every mean faster to download and run than downloading the source, compiling it and then running it on a server. Even downloading the biggest archives and installing (without configuration) is normally done in under one minute. That's the time saving aspect, and you got no broken ebuilds. Of course you got another can of worms that may be bug you instead. And if you don't like the example of Chromium, then take MySQL e.g. instead. People in a CE rarely have the time to deal with the added complicity of Gentoo compared to binary based distributions, and therefore Gentoo just don't fit for most of them. +1 gentoo in a very real sense is my distribution. my /etc and my /var/lib/portage/world and i have geezer-linux-desktop and geezer-linux-server but in a corporate environment it is someone else's problem be that low level... rather than have an inhouse developer to fix the web application bugs, they would have a Next Generation Unified Threat Management Firewall to block people taking advantage of those bugs. the question is how it is sold. also it is a lot easier for someone to click on the little balloon that says updates pending than to think about what it is they are doing. equally it is easier to convince a business to buy one server instead of trying to cluster two or more -- then you _must_ do updates at 3am, but updates are somehting that should happen when the updater is most alert imho. the business shifts the responsibility of the down time in the same way as they would shift the responsibility of the lower levels of distro management. The thing is: compiling your own binaries on a production server is something many people won't like, because it takes power from the other processes away for that time. +1 And having a fully fledged C/C++ compiler running on your server is a security hole, if you are paranoid enough. +1 Of course you could setup just a compiling server for all of your other servers, but this takes time and adds complexity. surprisingly little - honestly. Steady release cycle is also not so good. It depends on your case. All the major BSDs, FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD, have had a steady release cycle - a new release every
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 10:06:23 +, thegeezer wrote: * stable releases with a more or less stable and predictable release cycle, debatable - i would suggest better tested than stable otherwise there would be no need for debian bugzilla The vagaries of English strike again! When Debian use the word stable, they mean not changing much not the opposite of unstable, as in a stable relationship. Which is why the other branch is called testing and unstable. While not changing working code very often also leads to the other sort of stability, the advantage for those managing large numbers of systems is that they are not continually applying updates and restarting services and users are not continually presented with slightly different interfaces. -- Neil Bothwick Love is grand. Divorce is a few grand more. pgpdLe8SjJLeL.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 10:39:17AM +0200, Gevisz wrote Moreover, if I had to maintain computers for *other* users, I would not mind to upgrade their binary distributions every 2 or, better, every 5 years even if *their* working environment would every time change from Gnome2 to Unity and then back to Gnome3. Especially, if it is not my duty to retrain them for this new environment. :) But for myself, I would prefer that my desktop interface would change as little as possible, and only in the direction I want. :) I've been running ICEWM for over 4 years, and blackbox for a few years before that. What desktop interface change? :) -- Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org I don't run desktop environments; I run useful applications
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
Am 26.11.2014 um 21:39 schrieb Walter Dnes: I've been running ICEWM for over 4 years, and blackbox for a few years before that. What desktop interface change? :) Switching to ratpoison or i3wm, of course. :
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 06:53:14 +0200, Gevisz wrote: Wouldn't it have been easier to use the simple configuration option to move the button back to where you expected it? Far less effort than switching distros. No. It is not possible in Unity or, at least, it was not possible in Unity at the time when Ubuntu 12.04 was released. They really *forced* their users to accept the new place of the closing window frame button and have argued that it is more ergonomic. It was possible, Google has hits on this dated from shortly after the time Unity was released. I even can agree with them that a new place of that button was logical, ergonomic and saved screen space. So, there was nothing bad placing it there by default, especially for those who never used computer before. Agreed, I use KDE, which allows button layouts to be changed easily, and have had the window controls on the left for years. -- Neil Bothwick Always remember to pillage before you burn. pgp1WgNnWGzS8.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On 25/11/2014 09:15, Gevisz wrote: I even can agree with them that a new place of that button was logical, ergonomic and saved screen space. Only now, I have realized that, logically, it was possible to rearrange all the elements of Unity in such a way that it was logical, ergonomic, saved space, and moreover kept the window frame close button at its usual place, but it was not possible with the Unity configuration anyway. This is incorrect. Unity has always been able to reposition the window control buttons, right from the first release. Perhaps you just didn't know how or where to change it. Doesn't mean it was not possible to change it. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Tuesday 25 November 2014 11:45:50 Alan McKinnon wrote: On 25/11/2014 09:15, Gevisz wrote: I even can agree with them that a new place of that button was logical, ergonomic and saved screen space. Only now, I have realized that, logically, it was possible to rearrange all the elements of Unity in such a way that it was logical, ergonomic, saved space, and moreover kept the window frame close button at its usual place, but it was not possible with the Unity configuration anyway. This is incorrect. Sorry Alan, but it isn't. Read what you quote again. He said only now, I have realised that ... Unity has always been able to reposition the window control buttons, right from the first release. Perhaps you just didn't know how or where to change it. Doesn't mean it was not possible to change it. As above. :-) -- Rgds Peter.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 11:45:50 +0200 Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On 25/11/2014 09:15, Gevisz wrote: I even can agree with them that a new place of that button was logical, ergonomic and saved screen space. Only now, I have realized that, logically, it was possible to rearrange all the elements of Unity in such a way that it was logical, ergonomic, saved space, and moreover kept the window frame close button at its usual place, but it was not possible with the Unity configuration anyway. This is incorrect. Unity has always been able to reposition the window control buttons, right from the first release. I still have Ubuntu 12.04 (with Unity) on one of my partitions (but never use it for more that 5 minutes from the startup to shutdown, anyway :). So, I can check if your statement is true. Just tell me how to reposition the window control buttons in Unity. I promise to report the result of this test here. Back in 2012, after trying to find how to do it, I looked into Ubuntu forum and found out that many users complained about it and always got the answer that it is impossible and that Ubuntu developers know better what the users need than the users itself. But even if you prove to be right (which I very much doubt), for me it turned out easier to find out how to install and maintain Gentoo (with gnome2, dwm and xfce4) than to find out how to reposition the window control buttons in Unity.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 08:41:10 + Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 06:53:14 +0200, Gevisz wrote: Wouldn't it have been easier to use the simple configuration option to move the button back to where you expected it? Far less effort than switching distros. No. It is not possible in Unity or, at least, it was not possible in Unity at the time when Ubuntu 12.04 was released. They really *forced* their users to accept the new place of the closing window frame button and have argued that it is more ergonomic. It was possible, Google has hits on this dated from shortly after the time Unity was released. Please, give me the link. I will check if it is correct on my old Ubuntu 12.04 partition (yes, I still have it) and report the result here.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 19:09:08 +0200, Gevisz wrote: It was possible, Google has hits on this dated from shortly after the time Unity was released. Please, give me the link. I will check if it is correct on my old Ubuntu 12.04 partition (yes, I still have it) and report the result here. Why not Google it yourself? I know it was possible at the time because I was asked. But I'm not interested in GNOME so it's not the sort of thing I bother remembering. I do recall that one way of doing it is with UbuntuTweak. -- Neil Bothwick Learn from your parents' mistakes - use birth control! pgpJ0lTJpLRxZ.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 20:13:53 +0100 Marc Stürmer m...@marc-stuermer.de wrote: Am 24.11.2014 um 19:25 schrieb Gevisz: I switched from Ubuntu 10.04 to Gentoo just because it forced closing window button x to the upper-left corner of the window in Unity of Ubuntu 12.04 while I used to look for it in the upper-right corner. :) So, I see no reason that those that hate systemd would not do the same. I also did for my own server. But the real strength and home of Debian on a server is in the corporate environment, and in a CE you are facing other challenges, namely: * long term support (meaning for a few years), Yes, I do agree with you. Long term support is indeed a challenge, especially when it ends and you have to update to the new release. * stable releases with a more or less stable and predictable release cycle, Yes, predictable release cycle with unpredictable changes from one release to the other is also a challenge. Especially when your video card stops working after the upgrade. For example from Ubuntu 6.04 to Ubunto 8.04. * steady stream of security updates as long as the release is being supported. Yes, updates come almost every day and their downloading and installing takes almost the same time as daily upgrade of Gentoo. (Except for compiling a new Firefox, of course. But now, this problem in Gentoo is solved by freezing the version of this browser: 24.8.0 in stable Gentoo tree vs 33.0 in Ubunto 12.04. :) ... the downloading all that crap also takes a lot of time. Downloading binaries takes of course some time, yes. But downloading e.g. the source code of Chromium compared to the binary of Chromium does take a multiply longer. And after the download of the binary you just need to unpack it and are ready to run it, on Gentoo you need to compile it. So binaries are by every mean faster to download and run than downloading the source, compiling it and then running it on a server. It depends on your connection speed. Even downloading the biggest archives and installing (without configuration) is normally done in under one minute. It usually took me from 10 to 20 minutes to download my daily updates in Ubuntu. For big packages - about 40 minutes or even more. That's the time saving aspect lol :) Of course you got another can of worms that may be bug you instead. My English is not so good to understand idioms but I guess that here we agree. :) And if you don't like the example of Chromium, then take MySQL e.g. instead. People in a CE rarely have the time to deal with the added complicity of Gentoo compared to binary based distributions, and therefore Gentoo just don't fit for most of them. If CE stands for Commercial Environment, I can agree. The thing is: compiling your own binaries on a production server is something many people won't like, because it takes power from the other processes away for that time. Agree. And having a fully fledged C/C++ compiler running on your server is a security hole, if you are paranoid enough. Never thought about it, but may be you are right. Of course you could setup just a compiling server for all of your other servers, but this takes time and adds complexity. Agree. Steady release cycle is also not so good. It depends on your case. Here I also can agree. All the major BSDs, FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD, have had a steady release cycle - a new release every half year - for almost two decades now and they are content with that. Probably they do not change API (or reposition window control buttons :) every 6 months.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 17:37:48 + Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 19:09:08 +0200, Gevisz wrote: It was possible, Google has hits on this dated from shortly after the time Unity was released. Please, give me the link. I will check if it is correct on my old Ubuntu 12.04 partition (yes, I still have it) and report the result here. Why not Google it yourself? Because it is very hard to google a link if it does not exist. Can you, please, help me? :) I know it was possible at the time because I was asked. But I'm not interested in GNOME so it's not the sort of thing I bother remembering. We are talking about Unity, not Gnome. Just one small link on how to relocate window control buttons in Unity! Please!
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
No. It is not possible in Unity or, at least, it was not possible in Unity at the time when Ubuntu 12.04 was released. They really *forced* their users to accept the new place of the closing window frame button and have argued that it is more ergonomic. There was not any possibility to change the place of the closing window frame button in Unity via configuration options. Quite a lot of Ubuntu users complained about it yet in Ubuntu 10.04, where the new place of that button was a new default though it was possible to change it back via configuration options. In Unity, it was absolutely impossible. Try Lubuntu, with LXDE.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 17:37:48 + Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 19:09:08 +0200, Gevisz wrote: I do recall that one way of doing it is with UbuntuTweak. Unity-tweak-tool cant move window buttons to the right in 14.04 as of September 3, 2014: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity-tweak-tool/+bug/1310056 Here is some quotes: mikolajek (mikorutko) wrote on 2014-09-03: It looks like the bug is still present. I've just installed a fresh 14.04 copy together with Unity Tweak Tool 0.0.6 and even though I select right for my window controls, they are not moved there. After I re-open window properties the setting is reverted back to default (Left). Iron Davey wrote on 2014-09-04: Confirmed as well with an upgrade to 14.04.1. This is truly annoying as I use Crossover to run many windows applications needed for work, and those apps all have the window controls on the right. J Phani Mahesh (phanimahesh) wrote on 2014-09-05: #14 Hello guys, Sorry, but *this can't be fixed*. Ubuntu decided to change the window titlebar behaviour in 14.04. So far, i have been unable to find any alternative way to change window decoration. I am of the opinion it isn't possible. If you think it is possible, and are able to successfully change the controls in 14.04 and up using any available tool/command or any tweak whatsoever, let me know how you did it, and I'll figure out a way to do it from UTT again. The last one is still unanswered. Epic fail, isn't it? The Mark Shuttleworth always stated that its goal with Ubuntu is to replace MS Windows. Now he has already achieved it: Ubuntu is as unconfigurable as MS Windows. No difference any more.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 11:21:06 -0700 Maxim Wexler maxim.wex...@gmail.com wrote: No. It is not possible in Unity or, at least, it was not possible in Unity at the time when Ubuntu 12.04 was released. They really *forced* their users to accept the new place of the closing window frame button and have argued that it is more ergonomic. There was not any possibility to change the place of the closing window frame button in Unity via configuration options. Quite a lot of Ubuntu users complained about it yet in Ubuntu 10.04, where the new place of that button was a new default though it was possible to change it back via configuration options. In Unity, it was absolutely impossible. Try Lubuntu, with LXDE. Thank you, but I have already tried Gentoo with xfce4. :) P.S. Actually, I have tried Lubuntu in my VirtualBox on Gentoo and did not liked it. May be Xubuntu would be a decent choice if I would like to return to pre-compiled commercial distribution but I much more like Gentoo with xfce4 now.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 19:55:07 +0200, Gevisz wrote: Please, give me the link. I will check if it is correct on my old Ubuntu 12.04 partition (yes, I still have it) and report the result here. Why not Google it yourself? Because it is very hard to google a link if it does not exist. Can you, please, help me? :) I did, I told you about UbuntuTweak, but here's a link http://bit.ly/1rpmTbK I know it was possible at the time because I was asked. But I'm not interested in GNOME so it's not the sort of thing I bother remembering. We are talking about Unity, not Gnome. From wikipedia's page on Unity: Unity is a graphical shell for the GNOME desktop environment developed by Canonical Ltd. -- Neil Bothwick Always be sincere even if you don't mean it. pgpPibsiktYSl.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On 25/11/2014 19:03, Gevisz wrote: On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 11:45:50 +0200 Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On 25/11/2014 09:15, Gevisz wrote: I even can agree with them that a new place of that button was logical, ergonomic and saved screen space. Only now, I have realized that, logically, it was possible to rearrange all the elements of Unity in such a way that it was logical, ergonomic, saved space, and moreover kept the window frame close button at its usual place, but it was not possible with the Unity configuration anyway. This is incorrect. Unity has always been able to reposition the window control buttons, right from the first release. I still have Ubuntu 12.04 (with Unity) on one of my partitions (but never use it for more that 5 minutes from the startup to shutdown, anyway :). So, I can check if your statement is true. Just tell me how to reposition the window control buttons in Unity. I have no idea dude. That was 2 1/2 years ago and I'm a Gentoo user so have zero interest in Ubuntu's Unity. Google knows the answer, you just have to ask the right questions. I did it then on a netbook that long since moved over to Mint then Bodhi and Google showed me the way. I don't know the answer to your question. I promise to report the result of this test here. Back in 2012, after trying to find how to do it, I looked into Ubuntu forum and found out that many users complained about it and always got the answer that it is impossible and that Ubuntu developers know better what the users need than the users itself. But even if you prove to be right (which I very much doubt), for me it turned out easier to find out how to install and maintain Gentoo (with gnome2, dwm and xfce4) than to find out how to reposition the window control buttons in Unity. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 21:56:05 +0200 Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On 25/11/2014 19:03, Gevisz wrote: On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 11:45:50 +0200 Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On 25/11/2014 09:15, Gevisz wrote: I even can agree with them that a new place of that button was logical, ergonomic and saved screen space. Only now, I have realized that, logically, it was possible to rearrange all the elements of Unity in such a way that it was logical, ergonomic, saved space, and moreover kept the window frame close button at its usual place, but it was not possible with the Unity configuration anyway. This is incorrect. Unity has always been able to reposition the window control buttons, right from the first release. I still have Ubuntu 12.04 (with Unity) on one of my partitions (but never use it for more that 5 minutes from the startup to shutdown, anyway :). So, I can check if your statement is true. Just tell me how to reposition the window control buttons in Unity. I have no idea dude. That was 2 1/2 years ago and I'm a Gentoo user so have zero interest in Ubuntu's Unity. Google knows the answer, you just have to ask the right questions. I did it then on a netbook that long since moved over to Mint then Bodhi and Google showed me the way. I don't know the answer to your question. The sad truth is that nobody knows that. This question on askUbuntu has been unanswered for about a year now, 604 views. http://askubuntu.com/questions/228854/how-to-move-window-control-buttons-to-unity-panel See also: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity-tweak-tool/+bug/1310056 Here is some quotes: mikolajek (mikorutko) wrote on 2014-09-03: It looks like the bug is still present. I've just installed a fresh 14.04 copy together with Unity Tweak Tool 0.0.6 and even though I select right for my window controls, they are not moved there. After I re-open window properties the setting is reverted back to default (Left). Iron Davey wrote on 2014-09-04: Confirmed as well with an upgrade to 14.04.1. This is truly annoying as I use Crossover to run many windows applications needed for work, and those apps all have the window controls on the right. J Phani Mahesh (phanimahesh) wrote on 2014-09-05: #14 Hello guys, Sorry, but *this can't be fixed*. Ubuntu decided to change the window titlebar behaviour in 14.04. So far, i have been unable to find any alternative way to change window decoration. I am of the opinion it isn't possible. If you think it is possible, and are able to successfully change the controls in 14.04 and up using any available tool/command or any tweak whatsoever, let me know how you did it, and I'll figure out a way to do it from UTT again.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 19:49:53 + Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 19:55:07 +0200, Gevisz wrote: Please, give me the link. I will check if it is correct on my old Ubuntu 12.04 partition (yes, I still have it) and report the result here. Why not Google it yourself? Because it is very hard to google a link if it does not exist. Can you, please, help me? :) I did, I told you about UbuntuTweak, but here's a link http://bit.ly/1rpmTbK Yes, but this simply does not work. This the bug report from April 19, 2014 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity-tweak-tool/+bug/1310056 And here is some quotes: mikolajek (mikorutko) wrote on 2014-09-03: It looks like the bug is still present. I've just installed a fresh 14.04 copy together with Unity Tweak Tool 0.0.6 and even though I select right for my window controls, they are not moved there. After I re-open window properties the setting is reverted back to default (Left). Iron Davey wrote on 2014-09-04: Confirmed as well with an upgrade to 14.04.1. This is truly annoying as I use Crossover to run many windows applications needed for work, and those apps all have the window controls on the right. J Phani Mahesh (phanimahesh) wrote on 2014-09-05: #14 Hello guys, Sorry, but *this can't be fixed*. Ubuntu decided to change the window titlebar behaviour in 14.04. So far, i have been unable to find any alternative way to change window decoration. I am of the opinion it isn't possible. If you think it is possible, and are able to successfully change the controls in 14.04 and up using any available tool/command or any tweak whatsoever, let me know how you did it, and I'll figure out a way to do it from UTT again. Epic fail, isn't? Mark Shuttleworth managed to create can't-be-solved problem just of an open air. He always stated that his goal with Ubuntu is to replace MS Windows. Now he has already achieved it: Ubuntu is as unconfigurable as MS Windows. No difference any more. I know it was possible at the time because I was asked. But I'm not interested in GNOME so it's not the sort of thing I bother remembering. We are talking about Unity, not Gnome. From wikipedia's page on Unity: Unity is a graphical shell for the GNOME desktop environment developed by Canonical Ltd.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 22:24:34 +0200, Gevisz wrote: Can you, please, help me? :) I did, I told you about UbuntuTweak, but here's a link http://bit.ly/1rpmTbK Yes, but this simply does not work. OK, so it doesn't work. The point was that it could be changed. I neither remember nor care how, but I did do it. I have enough trouble remembering things that are useful to me without wasting valuable storage space on irrelevant trivia. It's a desktop I don't use on a distro I don't use that is a couple of years old anyway. It's about as on-topic and relevant as WinXP. -- Neil Bothwick Never argue with an idiot. First, they bring you down to their level. Then they beat you with experience. pgpX3ocUqm_CC.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On 25 November 2014 at 23:42, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: The point was that it could be changed. […] […] It's about as on-topic and relevant as WinXP. No, the point was that sometimes even a small annoyance is plenty enough to drive people away. The point was that when you feel that the distro you're using takes a direction that doesn't fit you, you look for alternatives. And that's perfectly on-topic. What's off-topic is to figure out if the damn buttons could actually be moved or not. -- Emanuele Rusconi
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 00:35:18 +0100, Emanuele Rusconi wrote: The point was that it could be changed. […] […] It's about as on-topic and relevant as WinXP. No, the point was that sometimes even a small annoyance is plenty enough to drive people away. Well, if you put it like that. The point was that when you feel that the distro you're using takes a direction that doesn't fit you, you look for alternatives. And that's perfectly on-topic. In which case, What's off-topic is to figure out if the damn buttons could actually be moved or not. so is this, as it determines the level of annoyance. Changing distros because of a default for a configuration is like changing your car because the ashtray is full. Yes, that's a totally spurious analogy, as was the distro-switch that spawned this sub-thread. -- Neil Bothwick Life is a sexually transmitted disease and the mortality rate is 100%. pgpNKLKQv2ePj.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 00:35:18 +0100 Emanuele Rusconi ema...@gmail.com wrote: On 25 November 2014 at 23:42, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: The point was that it could be changed. […] […] It's about as on-topic and relevant as WinXP. No, the point was that sometimes even a small annoyance is plenty enough to drive people away. The point was that when you feel that the distro you're using takes a direction that doesn't fit you, you look for alternatives. It is exactly what I intended to say from the beginning. If the distro devs leave you no choice (at least in arranging its working iterface) and starting to say that they know better what you need, it is time to look for alternatives.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 00:56:58 + Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 00:35:18 +0100, Emanuele Rusconi wrote: The point was that it could be changed. […] […] It's about as on-topic and relevant as WinXP. No, the point was that sometimes even a small annoyance is plenty enough to drive people away. Well, if you put it like that. The point was that when you feel that the distro you're using takes a direction that doesn't fit you, you look for alternatives. And that's perfectly on-topic. In which case, What's off-topic is to figure out if the damn buttons could actually be moved or not. so is this, as it determines the level of annoyance. Changing distros because of a default for a configuration is like changing your car because the ashtray is full. Your analogy is not full. Just imagine that you do not smoke at all, have an allergy for the smoke and the smell of cigarettes ash. (It is easy for me because it is exactly my case.) Then, imagine that during the test drive of a new car you found out that its ashtray is full of ash that smells very strong and to empty it you should first completely disassemble the car, disinfect all its parts, change the parts that is impossible to disinfect (seats, etc.) and reassemble it again. Moreover, asking the car maker about it, you get the answer that its not a defect but a new feature that lets you enjoy the smell of *his* favorite cigarettes and frees you from the necessity to smoke while driving. The latter, in my view, is more full analogy of a annoying bag in the distro interface that was introduced by design and that nobody want or can fix for at least half a year and, when it finally gets fixed, the next distro just reproduces it anew.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
Am 25.11.2014 um 18:44 schrieb Gevisz: It usually took me from 10 to 20 minutes to download my daily updates in Ubuntu. For big packages - about 40 minutes or even more. That's the time saving aspect lol :) Not lol, it is like I told you. Binary distributions are a big, big time saver compared to a rolling update source based meta distribution like Gentoo. Another reason why many stick with Distros like e.g. Debian, SuSE or Ubuntu is: * you got a standardized environment/system. That's also a very big requirement if using it in a corporate environment, if not the most important one. I am not saying that this is not doable with Gentoo, but to achieve it with Gentoo you've got to implement quite some things. For Debian e.g. it comes free out of the box.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
The reason this question is so hard to answer is because it is not a technical question, it is a moral and ethical one. The links presented start to approach the issue being discussed in this light but do not entirely accept the right question. I suspect this is because it seems rather absurd. We shall analyze some popular responses in this light. Systemd is easy to work around! http://www.vitavonni.de/blog/201410/2014102101-avoiding-systemd.html except, https://lobste.rs/s/y5skqt/avoiding_systemd_isn_t_hard/comments/eayjn3#c_eayjn3 but http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html gives some decent counterpoints, which http://lwn.net/Articles/619992/ either supports or is ambivalent about. They all basically boil down to someone is doing the work, and if it is a better way to do it it will be okay. Except this isn't true. The proof by contradiction is exceptionally simple: If this was a just world, Lennart's pants would be on fire. Lennart's pants are not on fire. Therefore, this is not a just world, and justice must be manufactured. You might ask why his pants (and the pants of most systemd supporters) would be on fire. Well, https://pappp.net/?p=969 clearly explains how FLOS is not UNIX, and the easy counterpoints get thoroughly trashed http://lwn.net/Articles/440843/, and http://blog.lusis.org/blog/2014/11/20/systemd-redux/ here's a guy agreeing and suggesting everyone hit the big red EJECT. Why UNIX? Well, because that's just a concise, easy-to-phrase proxy for the deeper issue of https://pay.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/2k5b7e/the_concern_isnt_that_systemd_itself_isnt/ (aside: read the C++ in the kernel tangent if you are not familiar, it seems to mirror this argument taking place and notably, Linus has chosen a side on that one!) which is echoed here http://lwn.net/Articles/440843/ and here http://lwn.net/Articles/576078/ and here http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/ (start with unix philosophy) and here http://lwn.net/Articles/494605/. Once upon a time I met a very masterful troll who got me to say precisely what I needed to say precisely when I did not want to say it. What he got me to say was: Oct 27 06:05:30 ***I study the orthodoxy consistently[sic] Oct 27 06:05:38 R0b0t1`To find its flaws, yes So did Lennart co. study the orthodox to learn from its failures? Did they construct a conservative (re)implementation of the software exhibiting those failures? It has been shown and continues to be shown that: no, they are flying by the seat of their pants. A solution could have been constructed which requires far less labor. Not only far less of *their* labor, but far less labor for *everyone else* using a *nix. But they did not thoroughly investigate such avenues, even within their reimplementation! They are recreating bugs! It is impossible for them to claim they are doing it over to do it right, as they have already failed at that purpose. They have been shown to have wasted effort and continue to do so. When labor is scarce, that is the most unethical action one can undertake. On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Marc Joliet mar...@gmx.de wrote: Am Fri, 21 Nov 2014 01:32:16 -0600 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com: [...] I highly recommend the article John Corbet wrote for LWN a week ago: http://lwn.net/Articles/619992/ [...] Thanks for the link, it was a good read. FWIW, I found this linked in one of the comments: http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/ Both articles echo thoughts that I have more and more with every discussion regarding systemd. My takeaway is similar to that of the lwn.net article (that is, both sides are being unnecessarily thick-headed), and find it remarkable how much I recognise from discussions here on gentoo-user (in contrast, gentoo-amd64 has been much more level-headed). However, I disagree with with the categorisation at the end, mainly because I hate it when people have to sort each other into camps, so that they know who to hate and who to like (which isn't the author's fault, I think, politicised discussions tend to go that way as they intensify), but also because I think it is too strict and doesn't account for overlap (for myself I see reasons for both being and not being in either group). Greetings -- Marc Joliet -- People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don't - Bjarne Stroustrup
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
Regardless, it would probably be useful to contact the people from the Debian project who were interested in forking it. It's likely Gentoo would end up using a fair amount of their work at some point. On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 6:18 AM, Sid S r03...@gmail.com wrote: The reason this question is so hard to answer is because it is not a technical question, it is a moral and ethical one. The links presented start to approach the issue being discussed in this light but do not entirely accept the right question. I suspect this is because it seems rather absurd. We shall analyze some popular responses in this light. Systemd is easy to work around! http://www.vitavonni.de/blog/201410/2014102101-avoiding-systemd.html except, https://lobste.rs/s/y5skqt/avoiding_systemd_isn_t_hard/comments/eayjn3#c_eayjn3 but http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html gives some decent counterpoints, which http://lwn.net/Articles/619992/ either supports or is ambivalent about. They all basically boil down to someone is doing the work, and if it is a better way to do it it will be okay. Except this isn't true. The proof by contradiction is exceptionally simple: If this was a just world, Lennart's pants would be on fire. Lennart's pants are not on fire. Therefore, this is not a just world, and justice must be manufactured. You might ask why his pants (and the pants of most systemd supporters) would be on fire. Well, https://pappp.net/?p=969 clearly explains how FLOS is not UNIX, and the easy counterpoints get thoroughly trashed http://lwn.net/Articles/440843/, and http://blog.lusis.org/blog/2014/11/20/systemd-redux/ here's a guy agreeing and suggesting everyone hit the big red EJECT. Why UNIX? Well, because that's just a concise, easy-to-phrase proxy for the deeper issue of https://pay.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/2k5b7e/the_concern_isnt_that_systemd_itself_isnt/ (aside: read the C++ in the kernel tangent if you are not familiar, it seems to mirror this argument taking place and notably, Linus has chosen a side on that one!) which is echoed here http://lwn.net/Articles/440843/ and here http://lwn.net/Articles/576078/ and here http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/ (start with unix philosophy) and here http://lwn.net/Articles/494605/. Once upon a time I met a very masterful troll who got me to say precisely what I needed to say precisely when I did not want to say it. What he got me to say was: Oct 27 06:05:30 ***I study the orthodoxy consistently[sic] Oct 27 06:05:38 R0b0t1`To find its flaws, yes So did Lennart co. study the orthodox to learn from its failures? Did they construct a conservative (re)implementation of the software exhibiting those failures? It has been shown and continues to be shown that: no, they are flying by the seat of their pants. A solution could have been constructed which requires far less labor. Not only far less of *their* labor, but far less labor for *everyone else* using a *nix. But they did not thoroughly investigate such avenues, even within their reimplementation! They are recreating bugs! It is impossible for them to claim they are doing it over to do it right, as they have already failed at that purpose. They have been shown to have wasted effort and continue to do so. When labor is scarce, that is the most unethical action one can undertake. On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Marc Joliet mar...@gmx.de wrote: Am Fri, 21 Nov 2014 01:32:16 -0600 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com: [...] I highly recommend the article John Corbet wrote for LWN a week ago: http://lwn.net/Articles/619992/ [...] Thanks for the link, it was a good read. FWIW, I found this linked in one of the comments: http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/ Both articles echo thoughts that I have more and more with every discussion regarding systemd. My takeaway is similar to that of the lwn.net article (that is, both sides are being unnecessarily thick-headed), and find it remarkable how much I recognise from discussions here on gentoo-user (in contrast, gentoo-amd64 has been much more level-headed). However, I disagree with with the categorisation at the end, mainly because I hate it when people have to sort each other into camps, so that they know who to hate and who to like (which isn't the author's fault, I think, politicised discussions tend to go that way as they intensify), but also because I think it is too strict and doesn't account for overlap (for myself I see reasons for both being and not being in either group). Greetings -- Marc Joliet -- People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don't - Bjarne Stroustrup
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
Am 21.11.2014 um 18:36 schrieb Philip Webb: Adoption of Systemd by other major distros sb good for Gentoo. Disgruntled Debians, Fedoras, Archies (IIRC they've also adopted it) will have a choice of giving in or moving to Slackware or Gentoo. Well, Gentoo is for sure quite a different beast compared to Fedora, Debian or Ubuntu. I don't think so, that many people are going to switch to Gentoo just because of Systemd, because of the differences between Gentoo and e.g. Debian. All other major distros are: binary distributed (timesaver!), have a steady release cycle (contrary to Gentoo's rolling upgrade) and each version has a documented feature set. Especially in server environments many people don't want to compile their stuff on production environment and have a rolling upgrade distribution. And especially in server environments there seems to be the biggest resistance against systemd. So naturally they would look for something that has a steady release cycle and is binary distributed, without systemd. E.g. Slackware or FreeBSD does fit that niche.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 18:54:26 +0100 Marc Stürmer m...@marc-stuermer.de wrote: Am 21.11.2014 um 18:36 schrieb Philip Webb: Adoption of Systemd by other major distros sb good for Gentoo. Disgruntled Debians, Fedoras, Archies (IIRC they've also adopted it) will have a choice of giving in or moving to Slackware or Gentoo. Well, Gentoo is for sure quite a different beast compared to Fedora, Debian or Ubuntu. I don't think so, that many people are going to switch to Gentoo just because of Systemd, because of the differences between Gentoo and e.g. Debian. I switched from Ubuntu 10.04 to Gentoo just because it forced closing window button x to the upper-left corner of the window in Unity of Ubuntu 12.04 while I used to look for it in the upper-right corner. :) So, I see no reason that those that hate systemd would not do the same. All other major distros are: binary distributed (timesaver!), I disagree: the downloading all that crap also takes a lot of time. have a steady release cycle (contrary to Gentoo's rolling upgrade) Steady release cycle is also not so good. Back to my example: I used to Ubunto 10.04 LTS with Gnome 2 and out of a sudden I was supposed to switch to Unity on Ubuntu 12.04. It led to the protest. :) Especially in server environments many people don't want to compile their stuff on production environment and have a rolling upgrade distribution. May be. I do not run servers so far. Only a couple of desktops. And especially in server environments there seems to be the biggest resistance against systemd. So naturally they would look for something that has a steady release cycle and is binary distributed, without systemd. E.g. Slackware or FreeBSD does fit that niche.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On 24 November 2014 at 18:54, Marc Stürmer m...@marc-stuermer.de wrote: I don't think so, that many people are going to switch to Gentoo just because of Systemd, because of the differences between Gentoo and e.g. Debian. I did. From Debian. Not because I hate systemd (NOW I'm in the anti camp, but I switched before I could have an opinion, and to be honest I didn't try systemd yet), but because I wanted a working alternative on my laptop before making the jump, and now that my Gentoo (Funtoo, actually) is clicking fine, I just don't feel the urge to go back to Debian. -- Emanuele Rusconi
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
Am 24.11.2014 um 19:25 schrieb Gevisz: I switched from Ubuntu 10.04 to Gentoo just because it forced closing window button x to the upper-left corner of the window in Unity of Ubuntu 12.04 while I used to look for it in the upper-right corner. :) So, I see no reason that those that hate systemd would not do the same. I also did for my own server. But the real strength and home of Debian on a server is in the corporate environment, and in a CE you are facing other challenges, namely: * long term support (meaning for a few years), * stable releases with a more or less stable and predictable release cycle, * steady stream of security updates as long as the release is being supported. Which also explains why in that field so many people are so heavily against SystemD, because it is still: * quite a young software project, which needs more time to mature in their eyes, * still a fast moving target, with adding more features over features with every new release, * maybe also the philosophical aspect that it violates one of the primary paradigms of UNIX: do one thing only and do that well, * and it forces them to learn a new way to configure their system, if they would use it. I disagree: the downloading all that crap also takes a lot of time. Downloading binaries takes of course some time, yes. But downloading e.g. the source code of Chromium compared to the binary of Chromium does take a multiply longer. And after the download of the binary you just need to unpack it and are ready to run it, on Gentoo you need to compile it. So binaries are by every mean faster to download and run than downloading the source, compiling it and then running it on a server. Even downloading the biggest archives and installing (without configuration) is normally done in under one minute. That's the time saving aspect, and you got no broken ebuilds. Of course you got another can of worms that may be bug you instead. And if you don't like the example of Chromium, then take MySQL e.g. instead. People in a CE rarely have the time to deal with the added complicity of Gentoo compared to binary based distributions, and therefore Gentoo just don't fit for most of them. The thing is: compiling your own binaries on a production server is something many people won't like, because it takes power from the other processes away for that time. And having a fully fledged C/C++ compiler running on your server is a security hole, if you are paranoid enough. Of course you could setup just a compiling server for all of your other servers, but this takes time and adds complexity. Steady release cycle is also not so good. It depends on your case. All the major BSDs, FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD, have had a steady release cycle - a new release every half year - for almost two decades now and they are content with that.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 20:25:22 +0200, Gevisz wrote: I switched from Ubuntu 10.04 to Gentoo just because it forced closing window button x to the upper-left corner of the window in Unity of Ubuntu 12.04 while I used to look for it in the upper-right corner. :) Wouldn't it have been easier to use the simple configuration option to move the button back to where you expected it? Far less effort than switching distros. -- Neil Bothwick By the time you can make ends meet, they move the ends. pgpDtxzSUGXyG.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 21:05:16 + Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 20:25:22 +0200, Gevisz wrote: I switched from Ubuntu 10.04 to Gentoo just because it forced closing window button x to the upper-left corner of the window in Unity of Ubuntu 12.04 while I used to look for it in the upper-right corner. :) Wouldn't it have been easier to use the simple configuration option to move the button back to where you expected it? Far less effort than switching distros. No. It is not possible in Unity or, at least, it was not possible in Unity at the time when Ubuntu 12.04 was released. They really *forced* their users to accept the new place of the closing window frame button and have argued that it is more ergonomic. There was not any possibility to change the place of the closing window frame button in Unity via configuration options. Quite a lot of Ubuntu users complained about it yet in Ubuntu 10.04, where the new place of that button was a new default though it was possible to change it back via configuration options. In Unity, it was absolutely impossible. I even can agree with them that a new place of that button was logical, ergonomic and saved screen space. So, there was nothing bad placing it there by default, especially for those who never used computer before. Even more: if they just had changed a default and allowed changing it back via configuration option, I would probably switched to the new place of that button later. It is *forcing* old users to change their habits just after upgrade from Ubuntu 10.04 LST to Ubuntu 12.04 LST make me looking for an alternative distribution. And it was the first time when I carefully looked though all the alternatives and make my choice consciously. (Before that my choice was mainly influenced by the people who helped me to install and maintain my first Linux systems: Suse at the time when it was still free :), Red Hat :(, or just advised me to try them: Alt Linux, Ubuntu.) I think that I made the right choice now and I like Gentoo distribution, though it has its own shortcomings. For example, Firefox 24.8.0 in stable Gentoo tree when outdated Ubuntu 12.04 has Firefox 33.0. (It is not that I am running for the version numbers but Google sites do not support Firefox 24.8 any more.)
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 06:53:14 +0200 Gevisz gev...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 21:05:16 + Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 20:25:22 +0200, Gevisz wrote: I switched from Ubuntu 10.04 to Gentoo just because it forced closing window button x to the upper-left corner of the window in Unity of Ubuntu 12.04 while I used to look for it in the upper-right corner. :) Wouldn't it have been easier to use the simple configuration option to move the button back to where you expected it? Far less effort than switching distros. No. It is not possible in Unity or, at least, it was not possible in Unity at the time when Ubuntu 12.04 was released. They really *forced* their users to accept the new place of the closing window frame button and have argued that it is more ergonomic. There was not any possibility to change the place of the closing window frame button in Unity via configuration options. Quite a lot of Ubuntu users complained about it yet in Ubuntu 10.04, where the new place of that button was a new default though it was possible to change it back via configuration options. In Unity, it was absolutely impossible. I even can agree with them that a new place of that button was logical, ergonomic and saved screen space. Only now, I have realized that, logically, it was possible to rearrange all the elements of Unity in such a way that it was logical, ergonomic, saved space, and moreover kept the window frame close button at its usual place, but it was not possible with the Unity configuration anyway. It is *forcing* old users to change their habits just after upgrade from Ubuntu 10.04 LST to Ubuntu 12.04 LST make me looking for an alternative distribution. And it was the first time when I carefully looked though all the alternatives and make my choice consciously. (Before that my choice was mainly influenced by the people who helped me to install and maintain my first Linux systems: Suse at the time when it was still free :), Red Hat :(, or just advised me to try them: Alt Linux, Ubuntu.) I think that I made the right choice now and I like Gentoo distribution, though it has its own shortcomings. For example, Firefox 24.8.0 in stable Gentoo tree when outdated Ubuntu 12.04 has Firefox 33.0. (It is not that I am running for the version numbers but Google sites do not support Firefox 24.8 any more.)
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On 11/21/2014 2:32 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: As long as there are developers willing and able to support OpenRC in Gentoo (and it looks like there are), that will be the case. To make sure that this remains to be true, help them. This is really an incorrect (and even borderline arrogant) answer... To answer the OPs question correctly... Since OpenRC is the *default* - for now at least - it is *king*, and systemd is the red-headed step-child, and as such OpenRC is and will be 100% fully supported. With that in mind, it is also 100% on the *systemd proponents* to make sure that *systemd* is 'fully supported' as an *alternate* init system. Side-note, unless the nature of systemd changes quite a bit for the better in the future, if its supporters are ever able to force a change to it as the default init in gentoo, that will be the day I switch to FreeBSD.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 11/21/2014 2:32 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: As long as there are developers willing and able to support OpenRC in Gentoo (and it looks like there are), that will be the case. To make sure that this remains to be true, help them. This is really an incorrect (and even borderline arrogant) answer... You are, of course, wrong. Mine is the correct (and actually the only) answer. To answer the OPs question correctly... Since OpenRC is the *default* - for now at least - it is *king*, and systemd is the red-headed step-child, and as such OpenRC is and will be 100% fully supported. From Rich Freeman in this very thread, who (unlike you or me) is a Gentoo dev, and a member of the council to boot: My (personal) sense is that in the medium-term we may end up moving to not having any default at all, just as with bootloaders, kernels, syslog, crontab, mail, etc. That is pretty-much the Gentoo way everywhere else when there are options. As you already pointed out, as long as somebody cares to maintain openrc and write init scripts for it, there will be support for it. With that in mind, it is also 100% on the *systemd proponents* to make sure that *systemd* is 'fully supported' as an *alternate* init system. And that's exactly what's happening... in Gentoo, GNOME officially supports only systemd, not OpenRC. Who is king again? Side-note, unless the nature of systemd changes quite a bit for the better in the future, if its supporters are ever able to force a change to it as the default init in gentoo, that will be the day I switch to FreeBSD. You should read: http://www.slideshare.net/iXsystems/jordan-hubbard-free-bsd-the-next-10-years It's a presentation from a Core FreeBSD developer about the future of FreeBSD. Of particular interest is slide 33: • I'm trying really hard not to suggest launchd here (so I won't) • The idea of registering everything up-front with a broker and then letting IPC / timers / HW events start things from there (in cascade fashion) is still the right architecture • Even the linux die-hards have essentially grasped the necessity of systemd (even though they're going to hate on it for awhile longer) So, don't be surprised if FreeBSD develops something *really* similar (along the lines of the second bullet) to systemd in the future Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
Am Sun, 23 Nov 2014 12:07:08 -0600 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com: On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: [...] To answer the OPs question correctly... Since OpenRC is the *default* - for now at least - it is *king*, and systemd is the red-headed step-child, and as such OpenRC is and will be 100% fully supported. [...] With that in mind, it is also 100% on the *systemd proponents* to make sure that *systemd* is 'fully supported' as an *alternate* init system. And that's exactly what's happening... in Gentoo, GNOME officially supports only systemd, not OpenRC. Who is king again? [...] I get the distinct feeling that you two should probably read the LWN article again. -- Marc Joliet -- People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don't - Bjarne Stroustrup signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On 11/23/2014 2:02 PM, Marc Joliet mar...@gmx.de wrote: I get the distinct feeling that you two should probably read the LWN article again. No need... This: In the end, it comes down to this: it just is not that important. It is just a system initialization utility. simply proves that the author either doesn't have a clue what systemd is, or is attempting to obfuscate what it really is. It is *much* more than '/just a system initialization utility', and in fact, all of the brou-ha-ha is *because* of this fact.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On 11/23/2014 1:07 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: So, don't be surprised if FreeBSD develops something *really* similar (along the lines of the second bullet) to systemd in the future Doesn't matter because: a) it won't be systemd (with all of its warts) b) it won't be written by Lennart and company (so won't have any of that baggage either) Also, I'll wager it likely won't be implemented in such a way as to be perceived by its user base as being shoved down their throats. They will, I'm sure, that the long view (this slideshow is simply take the best parts of systemd, lose the garbage (that is the source of most of the angst), and end up with something rather sane.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On 11/23/2014 3:23 PM, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: Also, I'll wager it likely won't be implemented in such a way as to be perceived by its user base as being shoved down their throats. Clarification - this reference was actually to the way Debian is handling it, not Gentoo - I have no problems whatsoever with the way gentoo is handling systemd ... right now at least...
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 11/23/2014 1:07 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: So, don't be surprised if FreeBSD develops something *really* similar (along the lines of the second bullet) to systemd in the future Doesn't matter because: a) it won't be systemd (with all of its warts) b) it won't be written by Lennart and company (so won't have any of that baggage either) Oh my. So it's the name of the project and (one) author? All the design and ideas behind it are irrelevant then? You just gave me the most perfect justification to never ever take you seriously in this subject. Good day, sir. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On 11/23/2014 3:34 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 11/23/2014 1:07 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: So, don't be surprised if FreeBSD develops something *really* similar (along the lines of the second bullet) to systemd in the future Doesn't matter because: a) it won't be systemd (with all of its warts) b) it won't be written by Lennart and company (so won't have any of that baggage either) Oh my. So it's the name of the project and (one) author? All the design and ideas behind it are irrelevant then? Not what I said at all, and certainly not what I meant, and you know (or should have known) it. I was talking about THE BAGGAGE that comes with those two things (the name, and its association with Lennart). Regardless of whether or not you agree with the sentiments, are you seriously suggesting those two things aren't 'baggage' in this case?
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 2:32 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: It's actually a great thing for a lot of use cases. But it doesn't seem that Gentoo will change defaults soon, although systemd works great with it. My (personal) sense is that in the medium-term we may end up moving to not having any default at all, just as with bootloaders, kernels, syslog, crontab, mail, etc. That is pretty-much the Gentoo way everywhere else when there are options. As you already pointed out, as long as somebody cares to maintain openrc and write init scripts for it, there will be support for it. Many init scripts and systemd units are contributed by outside users already, and policy is that maintainers cannot block them from being added to packages (though they do not have to write/maintain them personally). Gentoo doesn't really tend to exclude anything, and inclusion is a matter of whether somebody wants to put in the work. -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On 11/21/14 07:00, Rich Freeman wrote: On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 2:32 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: It's actually a great thing for a lot of use cases. But it doesn't seem that Gentoo will change defaults soon, although systemd works great with it. My (personal) sense is that in the medium-term we may end up moving to not having any default at all, just as with bootloaders, kernels, syslog, crontab, mail, etc. That is pretty-much the Gentoo way everywhere else when there are options. As you already pointed out, as long as somebody cares to maintain openrc and write init scripts for it, there will be support for it. Many init scripts and systemd units are contributed by outside users already, and policy is that maintainers cannot block them from being added to packages (though they do not have to write/maintain them personally). Gentoo doesn't really tend to exclude anything, and inclusion is a matter of whether somebody wants to put in the work. Rich Very wall expressed and neutral. This is an 800 lb gorilla that nobody seems to be talking about; that is embedded linux. Embedded linux now accounts for at least 20 times the number of deployments of linux than workstations and servers combined; some argue it is far more, others a bit less. Regardless, embedded linux is a force that is driving the semiconductor markets. There's not much margin on 32bit or less. etc etc. The main point of embedded linux is take what Rich has articulated above and multiply it by a billion. There is no such thing as standard embedded linux. If Systemd is successful, with very large embedded systems (dozens to hundreds of cores) then it has a future. If it fails in that space, it may survive, but not likely. It will old serve to isolate those distros that go down that path, exclusively, *imho*. Regardless, the smaller, cheaper embedded linux crowd is very unlikely to ever embrace systemd. Why? Glad you asks. Thousands of reasons, but, here are a few: It is very common in embedded (anything) to run multiple and often different rtos (real time operating system) on different embedded systems products, often to circumvent licenses, royalties, duplication, security and a plethora of other reasons. Furthermore, many embedded systems run simultaneous codes on a single core and systemd does not fit into that scheme of things, at all. So, even if gentoo becomes stupid and decides to abandon openrc. Many folks will just move to embedded (gentoo) linux and play follow the leaders with bootstrapping there cores. Rest easy as the devs fight this one out. I hope systemd survives and prospers. I can tell you one area of massive failure and that is clustering/cloud computing. Sure the big dogs with big buck are claiming to use systemd, but they only roll out binary offerings. When others try to use one of the commercial brands of linux and build a cluster/cloud from the source-codes up, there are all sorts of problems. Hmm. Very strange, batman. Very strange. What is going on, is wildly variant. YMMV. But, should I be a sporting man, my money is on the embedded folks deciding if something other than systemd survives. Why do I bet on embedded folks? Easy. I personally know of dozens of folks that code in machine, assembler all the way through any language they choose. They routinely build entire systems, custom on a wide bit of processors. Only a few of those folks are necessary to keep alternatives to systemd alive, prosperous and clearly documented. There are most likely tens of thousands of the folks around the world. Do the math. Each time one of these experts build an embedded (linux) system, it is usually optimized and so wonderful, that companies clone them in counts of thousands to millions of deployed linux systems. The fact that the majority rare require human tinkering, is both a testament to how well they run and the wisdon of these brilliant developers to keep the rank and file humanoids using winblows and OXlooser operating systems. A forking of the linux kernel would be the best thing to happen to opensource, in a very, very long time. The kernel development has become a good ole boys club imho. Embedded linux runs everywhere; so rest easy! peace, James
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
141121 Rich Freeman wrote: My personal sense is that in the medium-term we may end up moving to not having any default at all, just as with bootloaders, kernels, syslog, crontab, mail etc. That is pretty-much the Gentoo way everywhere else when there are options. As you already pointed out, as long as somebody cares to maintain openrc and write init scripts for it, there will be support for it. Many init scripts and systemd units are contributed by outside users already and policy is that maintainers cannot block them from being added to pkgs, though they do not have to write/maintain them personally. Gentoo doesn't really tend to exclude anything and inclusion is a matter of whether somebody wants to put in the work. Adoption of Systemd by other major distros sb good for Gentoo. Disgruntled Debians, Fedoras, Archies (IIRC they've also adopted it) will have a choice of giving in or moving to Slackware or Gentoo. Many of them may decide the moderate amount of extra work with Gentoo is well worth the freedom to use a more traditional init system as serious programmers, many wb able to offer help to Gentoo development. Time will tell, but probably fairly soon. -- ,, SUPPORT ___//___, Philip Webb ELECTRIC /] [] [] [] [] []| Cities Centre, University of Toronto TRANSIT`-O--O---' purslowatchassdotutorontodotca
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On 11/21/14 07:31, Marc Stürmer wrote: Am 21.11.2014 um 08:17 schrieb Paige Thompson: I just read an article that says systemd is taking over linux and linux is not linux anymore: http://blog.lusis.org/blog/2014/11/20/systemd-redux/ I kinda have to agree which is partially why I'm not using it. Will Gentoo have any plans of forcing its users to move to systemd or will I always (such as its always roughly been) have the option of using init and openrc as it is now? I personally have no reasons currently to You've been on this list for surely long enough to know, that systemd will always be optional for Gentoo users with Openrc not going away too soon as the default. Being on the list hasn't done me any favors in terms of knowing architectural plans are to be made. I personally want to believe systemd will always be optional but I wouldn't rely on that since it's not my call but I understand that it would have to be fairly mutual amongst other maintainers. I was hoping this e-mail would find some of those people. I remember a time when devfs support was dropped from Gentoo in favor of udev. I don't remember why but it seems udev is on everything now.. sound familiar? It wasn't that big of a switch for me.. I think there might have been maybe one or two packages that it affected that I cared about. On the other hand, today I am a bit more saavy than back then and I don't really feel like systemd offers anything that I want and it seems to be followed by a lot of security problems that I don't need. I don't want to perpetuate ignorance, so correct me if I'm wrong. It seems like for me specifically to switch to systemd would mean to take on a lot more complexity than I need if I'm already happy with what I've got? Asides from where systemd is useful outside of cgroups for virtualization I fail to understand how process accounting is useful in any other context except for multi-user environments--public shell servers? I guess I'll have to do some more reading to understand. It's just nice to know what I have to look forward to in advance. I have a friend who seems certain that systemd is inevitable despite being satisfied with openrc. Not trying to troll or force ignorant/zealous issues. Thanks -Paige
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 12:39 PM, wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: Regardless, the smaller, cheaper embedded linux crowd is very unlikely to ever embrace systemd. Why? Glad you asks. Thousands of reasons, but, here are a few: It is very common in embedded (anything) to run multiple and often different rtos (real time operating system) on different embedded systems products, often to circumvent licenses, royalties, duplication, security and a plethora of other reasons. Furthermore, many embedded systems run simultaneous codes on a single core and systemd does not fit into that scheme of things, at all. Embedded is a VERY broad term. I agree that systemd isn't applicable in all of these cases, but honestly in the cases where it doesn't apply I don't see something like openrc or even sysvinit being a great solution. For the more PC-like appliance something like systemd is fairly compelling once it matures, because it is basically a standardized collection of stuff designed to work together. You could look at it a bit like busybox in that regard. This argument is also a bit like saying that since most embedded devices don't have high-res displays, X11 and Wayland are dead-end technologies. The reality is that embedded tends to do things differently - it is related to your typical desktop distro, but not really in pure competition. Look at it another way - the most popular PID 1 on Gentoo-derived systems isn't even in the main portage repository. I'm speaking of course of Chromebooks, which run Upstart. -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On 11/21/14 07:32, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 1:17 AM, Paige Thompson erra...@yourstruly.sx wrote: I just read an article that says systemd is taking over linux and linux is not linux anymore: http://blog.lusis.org/blog/2014/11/20/systemd-redux/ I highly recommend the article John Corbet wrote for LWN a week ago: http://lwn.net/Articles/619992/ TL;DR, the sky is not falling, let's see how systemd evolves and succeds, fails, or it's replaced. I kinda have to agree which is partially why I'm not using it. Will Gentoo have any plans of forcing its users to move to systemd or will I always (such as its always roughly been) have the option of using init and openrc as it is now? As long as there are developers willing and able to support OpenRC in Gentoo (and it looks like there are), that will be the case. To make sure that this remains to be true, help them. I personally have no reasons currently to switch from one to the other. It seems like it might be a great thing if you have linux containers. It's actually a great thing for a lot of use cases. But it doesn't seem that Gentoo will change defaults soon, although systemd works great with it. Regards. Great article, I should merely point out it's ridiculous that people get so bent out of shape over computer software. It contrasted the transition of devfs to udev well which I can relate to and thought of in my previous response. I was trying to explain I don't really know enough about either systemd or openrc to say whether or not support for one or the other will ever be dropped. My deal is I have everything I want setup, it works and I want to leave it that way. I deal with security problems and updates proactively and on a case-by-case and as-per-needed basis. I'm not looking forward to migrating to systemd if I don't need to but I will if that's what it takes to get back to my real work with the peace of mind that I can still install new software if I choose to and actually be able to use it.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On 11/21/14 17:39, wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: On 11/21/14 07:00, Rich Freeman wrote: On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 2:32 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote: It's actually a great thing for a lot of use cases. But it doesn't seem that Gentoo will change defaults soon, although systemd works great with it. My (personal) sense is that in the medium-term we may end up moving to not having any default at all, just as with bootloaders, kernels, syslog, crontab, mail, etc. That is pretty-much the Gentoo way everywhere else when there are options. As you already pointed out, as long as somebody cares to maintain openrc and write init scripts for it, there will be support for it. Many init scripts and systemd units are contributed by outside users already, and policy is that maintainers cannot block them from being added to packages (though they do not have to write/maintain them personally). Gentoo doesn't really tend to exclude anything, and inclusion is a matter of whether somebody wants to put in the work. Rich Very wall expressed and neutral. This is an 800 lb gorilla that nobody seems to be talking about; that is embedded linux. Embedded linux now accounts for at least 20 times the number of deployments of linux than workstations and servers combined; some argue it is far more, others a bit less. Regardless, embedded linux is a force that is driving the semiconductor markets. There's not much margin on 32bit or less. etc etc. The main point of embedded linux is take what Rich has articulated above and multiply it by a billion. There is no such thing as standard embedded linux. If Systemd is successful, with very large embedded systems (dozens to hundreds of cores) then it has a future. If it fails in that space, it may survive, but not likely. It will old serve to isolate those distros that go down that path, exclusively, *imho*. Regardless, the smaller, cheaper embedded linux crowd is very unlikely to ever embrace systemd. Why? Glad you asks. Thousands of reasons, but, here are a few: It is very common in embedded (anything) to run multiple and often different rtos (real time operating system) on different embedded systems products, often to circumvent licenses, royalties, duplication, security and a plethora of other reasons. Furthermore, many embedded systems run simultaneous codes on a single core and systemd does not fit into that scheme of things, at all. So, even if gentoo becomes stupid and decides to abandon openrc. Many folks will just move to embedded (gentoo) linux and play follow the leaders with bootstrapping there cores. Rest easy as the devs fight this one out. I hope systemd survives and prospers. I can tell you one area of massive failure and that is clustering/cloud computing. Sure the big dogs with big buck are claiming to use systemd, but they only roll out binary offerings. When others try to use one of the commercial brands of linux and build a cluster/cloud from the source-codes up, there are all sorts of problems. Hmm. Very strange, batman. Very strange. What is going on, is wildly variant. YMMV. But, should I be a sporting man, my money is on the embedded folks deciding if something other than systemd survives. Why do I bet on embedded folks? Easy. I personally know of dozens of folks that code in machine, assembler all the way through any language they choose. They routinely build entire systems, custom on a wide bit of processors. Only a few of those folks are necessary to keep alternatives to systemd alive, prosperous and clearly documented. There are most likely tens of thousands of the folks around the world. Do the math. Each time one of these experts build an embedded (linux) system, it is usually optimized and so wonderful, that companies clone them in counts of thousands to millions of deployed linux systems. The fact that the majority rare require human tinkering, is both a testament to how well they run and the wisdon of these brilliant developers to keep the rank and file humanoids using winblows and OXlooser operating systems. A forking of the linux kernel would be the best thing to happen to opensource, in a very, very long time. The kernel development has become a good ole boys club imho. Embedded linux runs everywhere; so rest easy! peace, James I hope for this to be the case
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On 11/21/14 18:20, Rich Freeman wrote: On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 12:39 PM, wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: Regardless, the smaller, cheaper embedded linux crowd is very unlikely to ever embrace systemd. Why? Glad you asks. Thousands of reasons, but, here are a few: It is very common in embedded (anything) to run multiple and often different rtos (real time operating system) on different embedded systems products, often to circumvent licenses, royalties, duplication, security and a plethora of other reasons. Furthermore, many embedded systems run simultaneous codes on a single core and systemd does not fit into that scheme of things, at all. Embedded is a VERY broad term. I agree that systemd isn't applicable in all of these cases, but honestly in the cases where it doesn't apply I don't see something like openrc or even sysvinit being a great solution. For the more PC-like appliance something like systemd is fairly compelling once it matures, because it is basically a standardized collection of stuff designed to work together. You could look at it a bit like busybox in that regard. This argument is also a bit like saying that since most embedded devices don't have high-res displays, X11 and Wayland are dead-end technologies. The reality is that embedded tends to do things differently - it is related to your typical desktop distro, but not really in pure competition. Look at it another way - the most popular PID 1 on Gentoo-derived systems isn't even in the main portage repository. I'm speaking of course of Chromebooks, which run Upstart. -- Rich I'm actually familiar with android / Qualcomm stuff and QuRT as well as OKL4. Honestly if it meant a substitute for QuRT could be made available to the public I'd say use whatever-- I'll never buy another device until then. Besides, I'm not sure at which point it became okay to buy a $400+ device use it for 6 months and then throw it in the trash and buy another but I won't be a part of that.
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
Am Fri, 21 Nov 2014 01:32:16 -0600 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com: [...] I highly recommend the article John Corbet wrote for LWN a week ago: http://lwn.net/Articles/619992/ [...] Thanks for the link, it was a good read. FWIW, I found this linked in one of the comments: http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/ Both articles echo thoughts that I have more and more with every discussion regarding systemd. My takeaway is similar to that of the lwn.net article (that is, both sides are being unnecessarily thick-headed), and find it remarkable how much I recognise from discussions here on gentoo-user (in contrast, gentoo-amd64 has been much more level-headed). However, I disagree with with the categorisation at the end, mainly because I hate it when people have to sort each other into camps, so that they know who to hate and who to like (which isn't the author's fault, I think, politicised discussions tend to go that way as they intensify), but also because I think it is too strict and doesn't account for overlap (for myself I see reasons for both being and not being in either group). Greetings -- Marc Joliet -- People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don't - Bjarne Stroustrup signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 1:17 AM, Paige Thompson erra...@yourstruly.sx wrote: I just read an article that says systemd is taking over linux and linux is not linux anymore: http://blog.lusis.org/blog/2014/11/20/systemd-redux/ I highly recommend the article John Corbet wrote for LWN a week ago: http://lwn.net/Articles/619992/ TL;DR, the sky is not falling, let's see how systemd evolves and succeds, fails, or it's replaced. I kinda have to agree which is partially why I'm not using it. Will Gentoo have any plans of forcing its users to move to systemd or will I always (such as its always roughly been) have the option of using init and openrc as it is now? As long as there are developers willing and able to support OpenRC in Gentoo (and it looks like there are), that will be the case. To make sure that this remains to be true, help them. I personally have no reasons currently to switch from one to the other. It seems like it might be a great thing if you have linux containers. It's actually a great thing for a lot of use cases. But it doesn't seem that Gentoo will change defaults soon, although systemd works great with it. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
Am 21.11.2014 um 08:17 schrieb Paige Thompson: I just read an article that says systemd is taking over linux and linux is not linux anymore: http://blog.lusis.org/blog/2014/11/20/systemd-redux/ I kinda have to agree which is partially why I'm not using it. Will Gentoo have any plans of forcing its users to move to systemd or will I always (such as its always roughly been) have the option of using init and openrc as it is now? I personally have no reasons currently to You've been on this list for surely long enough to know, that systemd will always be optional for Gentoo users with Openrc not going away too soon as the default.
