Re: [DNG] tobacco patch?
On 2020-05-16 16:51, Hendrik Boom wrote: > What do you mean by "tobacco patch"? It's an analogy with a medical device used to help smokers with quitting. -- Ian ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Device naming: was Felker Init: was without-systemd.org not working
On 2020-05-16 13:10, Rick Moen via Dng wrote: > I meant multiple subtrees of device node files classified in lots > of different and overlapping ways, by-uuid, and on and on. I'll take that one :-P Last year I nearly lost all my image and audio data, some 100G. I guess that's small potatoes today, but anyway _very_ valuable to me. It happened because I gave the wrong /dev/sd* name in a dd command when I was putting something on a stick, maybe it was Tails or something like it. If only I had listened to my nagging inner voice and looked at /dev/disk/by-id first, I'd have been okay. (I later recovered pretty much everything with photorec, much recommended.) -- Ian ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Felker Init: was without-systemd.org not working
Hello, Citando Steve Litt : It's such a shame. Runit and s6 were both there, waiting to be picked up and used. Both were 10 times easier than sysvinit. But n. All init systems that want to be taken seriously, need to accept also the system language.. As I understand, and was also recognized by s6 creator at devuan conference, s6 *cannot* run a script made in shell script( the systems language.. ) Maybe you think at it like been a superfluous thing, But is a major flaw, being it a init system for a operating system, and not beign able to run shell scripts( systemd has also this limitation.. ).. Best Regards, tux ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
[DNG] tobacco patch?
On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 05:30:03AM -0400, Steve Litt wrote: > > Runit and s6's process supervisors can also be used as tobacco patches > for sysvinit. > What do you mean by "tobacco patch"? -- hendrik ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Check default_transport if you can't send email through Postfix
hi, Citando Rick Moen via Dng : Quoting Ian Zimmerman (i...@very.loosely.org): Hi Rick :) Greetings, friend! Is there a reference to a Debian mailing list (or a similar digital history document) where the decision to switch to Postfix was taken? Upon re-examination, I believe I erred, and Exim4 remains Default MTA in Debian, albeit arguing over that vs. Postfix appears to be a sempiternal flamewar^W discussion. Exim4 is a very good MTA, Pseudo Operating systems like IBM RedHat, uses Postfix, Interestingly enough is that IBM started Postfix, but they use the good old Sendmail in Aix :) Postfix is multi-threaded, The only thing it has in favor( we could join to that a simpler way of configuration, no m4 needed like Sendmail), it consumes horrendous amounts of resources.. with no explanation for such hog resources behavior.. but it lacks a ton of features from Exim4( based in Sendmail ).. They are targeted at different audiences, and this is the root of "disagreement".. Postfix is for newbies, or for RedHat limited fanboys, Exim4 is for diehard Administrators, serious admins that dominate the "art of the sword" and understand its power, Also Sendmail is for top Samurai Warriors.. Because they don't serve the same audience at all, There are always such flamewars discussions.. [ The Wannabe vs The Samurai ] One audience with its limited knowledge, doesn't understand the other, And the other, refuses to use Postfix because they understand the "power of the sword" present in Exim4/Sendmail.. This is the most simple way, I think about them.. Remember that even IBM that made available Postfix, continues to use Sendmail in Aix :) You can't ask to a blind guy to drive a F1 Race Car.. I think each one should use what is most tailored to his knowledge/role.. Best Regards, ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Device naming: was Felker Init: was without-systemd.org not working
Quoting Steve Litt (sl...@troubleshooters.com): > If you're referring to the ethernet device being eno1 or enWhichUSB22 > instead of eth0, or wxbd3 or wl21Poettering423 instead of wlan0, I > prefer the new way. Here's why: No, that's not what I meant (and network interfaces don't have device node files, being unique and peculiar, that way). I meant multiple subtrees of device node files classified in lots of different and overlapping ways, by-uuid, and on and on. -- Cheers, Rick MoenDiaeresis: Keeping the cow out of co-worker since 700 AD. r...@linuxmafia.com McQ! (4x80) ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
[DNG] Device naming: was Felker Init: was without-systemd.org not working
On Sat, 16 May 2020 11:40:03 -0700 Rick Moen via Dng wrote: > [1] E.g., I remain unconvinced I need a half-dozen different ways to > refer to a device node. If you're referring to the ethernet device being eno1 or enWhichUSB22 instead of eth0, or wxbd3 or wl21Poettering423 instead of wlan0, I prefer the new way. Here's why: A very short shellscript, using the ip command multiple times, positively identifies the one and only wifi device on a computer, no matter where it's plugged in. I use that shellscript in all my runit run scripts, so I no longer need to specify a device name at all. On computers with multiple wifi devices, an additional piece of info is necessary. My shellscript's about 6 lines long, and adding a few more lines would make it accurate regardless of which naming convention is used. I put that shellscript on the DNG mailing list a year or two ago. SteveT Steve Litt May 2020 featured book: Troubleshooting Techniques of the Successful Technologist http://www.troubleshooters.com/techniques ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Felker Init: was without-systemd.org not working
On Sat, 16 May 2020 11:41:29 +0200 Antony Stone wrote: > On Saturday 16 May 2020 at 11:30:03, Steve Litt wrote: > > > You know, runit's or s6's process supervisor could be used, on > > systemd systems, as a tobacco patch to wean the user off systemd, > > one process at a time. As each daemon gets moved to runit or s6, > > that daemon's unit file name gets put in a shellscript that > > disables systemd's execution of that daemon. It's very easy to do. > > Surely one of the biggest problems (or at least, one of the things > people complain most about) regarding systemd is that it is no longer > just an init system. > > It may have been sold that way in the early days, but it's now > infiltrated so many parts of the GNU / Linux system that just telling > people (or showing them) that they can use something else to manage > their daemons is no longer enough. Your two preceding paragraphs are absolutely true, which is why s6 supervisor as a patch is an excellent tactic in the strategy to one by one either/both limit systemd damage and/or replace systemd functionalities. Another benefit if s6 as a tobacco patch and later tobacco patches: The more DIY types who do these things, the more collective knowledge will be available to call bullshit on the nonsense propagated by the Redhat/Freedesktop/Poettering axis and their chatterbox repeaters. My preceding paragraph is the carrot. The stick is that if we let systemd get too far ahead of us, it will become too bubble-gummed into our systems to ever remove. Just speaking for myself, I think a great intermediate goal for Devuan would be to keep the sysvinit PID1, and use it with the process supervisor for s6. s6 is still under active development and is getting **good** features all the time, while remaining simple and logical. SteveT Steve Litt May 2020 featured book: Troubleshooting Techniques of the Successful Technologist http://www.troubleshooters.com/techniques ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Felker Init: was without-systemd.org not working
Quoting Antony Stone (antony.st...@devuan.open.source.it): > It may have been sold that way in the early days, but it's now > infiltrated so many parts of the GNU / Linux system that just telling > people (or showing them) that they can use something else to manage > their daemons is no longer enough. Except that robust alternatives exist for all of the other major areas where systemd is touted as the One True Solution. And, as I've shown in my own modest writings, it remains a pretty easy task to swap in modular replacements, each chosen with an appropriate scope of functionality[1] rather than a figurative brass band (or in other cases, such as daemon supervision in most cases, electing to omit entirely as not needed). I mean, c'mon, this isn't the first time the right solution to scope creep and pathologically excessive integration was to say 'But I don't actually want that.' When the 'crowd pushing systemd' (to borrow Rich Felker's phrase), in early day ballyhooed how great systemd's allegedly innovative daemon supervision was, I was right then administering many hundreds of CentOS Internet servers running (selected) critical daemons under Chris McDonough's Python-based supervisord -- so, my reaction was 'What, you think you systemd guys invented process supervision? And what else, the light bulb? Toilet paper?' (To answer Rich Felker's doubt-raising, yes, supervisord is IMO robust enough, and also the others he cites.) IMO, pretty nearly the only place the systemd suite has an arguably compelling advantage is an exotic one: cgroups controller. This makes systemd irritably difficult to avoid for containerised cloud computing, and, cgroup controllers have that Highlander quality that 'There can be only one' (in a running system). The systemd implementation is crammed like much else into PID1, which has operational advantages over the better-security alternative of _not_ running it out of PID1 (as does OpenRC's implementation, https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/OpenRC/CGroups ). [1] E.g., I remain unconvinced I need a half-dozen different ways to refer to a device node. -- Cheers, Rick MoenDiaeresis: Keeping the cow out of co-worker since 700 AD. r...@linuxmafia.com McQ! (4x80) ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Felker Init: was without-systemd.org not working
On Saturday 16 May 2020 at 11:30:03, Steve Litt wrote: > You know, runit's or s6's process supervisor could be used, on systemd > systems, as a tobacco patch to wean the user off systemd, one process > at a time. As each daemon gets moved to runit or s6, that daemon's unit > file name gets put in a shellscript that disables systemd's execution > of that daemon. It's very easy to do. Surely one of the biggest problems (or at least, one of the things people complain most about) regarding systemd is that it is no longer just an init system. It may have been sold that way in the early days, but it's now infiltrated so many parts of the GNU / Linux system that just telling people (or showing them) that they can use something else to manage their daemons is no longer enough. Antony. -- Most people have more than the average number of legs. Please reply to the list; please *don't* CC me. ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
[DNG] Felker Init: was without-systemd.org not working
On Fri, 15 May 2020 14:44:06 -1000 Joel Roth via Dng wrote: > Reminds me to revisit https://ewontfix.com/14/ > for Felker's Broken by Design article on systemd. That web page changed my life. When I saw, on that page, how simple PID1 could really be, that was when I really started to despise systemd. I made a more or less complete init system by cobbling together Rich Felker's 16 line PID1 shown on https://ewontfix.com/14/ with daemontools-encore, a slightly updated but true to the original version of djb's daemontools. My init was a little squirrelly, as you can imagine, but if you were willing to run the shutdown script manually, and boot to CLI then startx, it pretty much worked. This enraged me: The fact that a Troubleshooting Trainer could make an init in a couple weeks, yet the Redhat/Freedesktop/Poettering axis was telling us what a complex thing an init was. By the way, if you're a Felkerist, runit comes closest to the full implementation of the Felker ideal. However, even Felker admitted that his 16 line PID1 wasn't necessarily sufficient. The s6 init has a PID1 that contains a very simple process supervisor that supervises one program: The real s6 process supervisor. So its PID1 does more than Felker's or runits, but only a defined amount more. > > None of the other init systems could compete > sysvinit due to the latter's huge installed > base. Except when marketing came along... It's such a shame. Runit and s6 were both there, waiting to be picked up and used. Both were 10 times easier than sysvinit. But n. Back in the mid 00's, I began switching my daemons from sysvinit and/or upstart to djb's daemontools. Life was just easier that way. My friends all told me that was stupid: Why learn two softwares when you could do it all with one? I'll tell you why: I could *never* understand either sysvinit or upstart, but once a daemon was set to run on daemontools, it was completely understandable. You know, runit's or s6's process supervisor could be used, on systemd systems, as a tobacco patch to wean the user off systemd, one process at a time. As each daemon gets moved to runit or s6, that daemon's unit file name gets put in a shellscript that disables systemd's execution of that daemon. It's very easy to do. Runit and s6's process supervisors can also be used as tobacco patches for sysvinit. SteveT Steve Litt May 2020 featured book: Troubleshooting Techniques of the Successful Technologist http://www.troubleshooters.com/techniques ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
