- Original Message -
From: Miles Fidelman mfidel...@meetinghouse.net
Hmm, now this one I wasn't aware of this tidbit here has made this
thread worthwhile to me, as we work on developing some clustered
'things' for use here. CoreOS wasn't even on the 'look at this at
some
- Original Message -
From: Gregory Boyce gregory.bo...@gmail.com
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Jeffrey Ollie j...@ocjtech.us
wrote:
I think that Debian's plan to allow multiple init systems
(irregardless of which one is default) is a bad plan. The
non-default
ones won't get
Original Message -
From: Jeffrey Ollie j...@ocjtech.us
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 9:48 PM, Jimmy Hess mysi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Barry Shein b...@world.std.com
wrote:
And you whisk all that away with it's not really clear to me that
'reboots in
after watching this discussion for a while, i have decided that i am in favour
of systemd.
i encourage its development, and widespread adoption.
it will hasten the demise of linux in the server enviroment, which can only
be a good thing.
if people really want to run their servers on the *nix
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
I will stipulate this use case.
I will counter with you wouldn't be running a real distro in that
case anyway; you'd be running something super trimmed down, and possibly
custom built, or based on something like CoreOS,
- Original Message -
From: Jeffrey Ollie j...@ocjtech.us
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com
wrote:
I will stipulate this use case.
I will counter with you wouldn't be running a real distro in that
case anyway; you'd be running something super
On 10/27/2014 11:35 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
I will counter with you wouldn't be running a real distro in that
case anyway; you'd be running something super trimmed down, and
possibly custom built, or based on something like CoreOS, that only
does one job. Well.
Hmm, now this one I wasn't
Lamar Owen wrote:
On 10/27/2014 11:35 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
I will counter with you wouldn't be running a real distro in that
case anyway; you'd be running something super trimmed down, and
possibly custom built, or based on something like CoreOS, that only
does one job. Well.
Hmm, now
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 12:28 AM, George Herbert
george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok. As a highly on- list-topic example of why distrust is called for...
Without referring to the systemd source code*, does anyone know what systemd
uses to select between networking subsystems (i.e.
When I'm talking about hardware initialization, I'm talking about the
huge part that appends *before* the kernel boots.
For example, hard-based RAID.
On my server, when I push the start button, bios start-up, do a lot of
awesome things (irony), start the raid (sloowly), and then, after 5min,
pop
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 11:59:44PM +0100, Tom Hill wrote:
It's Gentoo: You should write your own is the most likely answer.
Not if you ask nicely :)
--
Eray Aslan e...@gentoo.org
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Gregory Boyce gregory.bo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Jeffrey Ollie j...@ocjtech.us wrote:
I think that Debian's plan to allow multiple init systems
(irregardless of which one is default) is a bad plan. The non-default
ones won't get
On October 22, 2014 at 15:31 jfb...@gmail.com (Ricky Beam) wrote:
On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:31:02 -0400, Barry Shein b...@world.std.com wrote:
Perhaps you don't remember the days when an fsck was
basically mandatory and could take 15-20 minutes on a large disk.
Journaling has all but
On October 23, 2014 at 04:42 ra...@psg.com (Randy Bush) wrote:
Barry Schein:
Interesting you went to the trouble to add a 'c' to my name! You need
better quoting tools.
I'm reminded of the remark often attributed to DEC CEO Ken Olson,
roughly:
With VMS (their big complex OS) it
Going way off topic but what's still a disaster in log files is the
lack of standardization of output.
As another extreme OS/370 catalogued virtually (hah) every error msg,
if you thought you had a new one you added it to the catalogue as you
added it to an error msg in your program and it was
On Oct 21, 2014, at 6:03 PM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
GNOME is probably the linchpin.
But it's not just RH. It's Debian, and by extension *buntu, and SuSE, and
at least one other major independent parent distro that I can't think of
just now...
And as far as I know,
George Herbert wrote:
On Oct 21, 2014, at 6:03 PM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
GNOME is probably the linchpin.
But it's not just RH. It's Debian, and by extension *buntu, and SuSE, and
at least one other major independent parent distro that I can't think of
just now...
And as
On 22/10/14 10:41, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Which leads me to ask - those of you running server farms - what distros
are popular these days, for server-side operations? We've been running
Debian like forever (by way of Solaris and redhat) - but this systemd
thing is making me rethink things.
Before leaving Debian, things to think:
- will systemd be officialy the only system available ?
- if so, won't we get a way to bypass that ?
I'm not gonna throw Debian away due to such a mess, without fighting
hard, and I think you should do the same: talk, patch if needed, show
you're here
If
na...@jack.fr.eu.org (na...@jack.fr.eu.org) wrote:
I'm not gonna throw Debian away due to such a mess, without fighting
hard, and I think you should do the same: talk, patch if needed, show
you're here
...and sit it out with wheezy-LTS...
Elmar.
Which leads me to ask - those of you running server farms - what
distros are popular these days, for server-side operations?
been running bsd forever. but moving to debian and ganeti, as bsd does
not host virtualization. would love it if debian ditched this systemd
monstrosity and provided
Which leads me to ask - those of you running server farms - what
distros are popular these days, for server-side operations?
been running bsd forever. but moving to debian and ganeti, as bsd does
not host virtualization.
Simply not true; http://bhyve.org/
It is a bit immature compared
On 22 October 2014 11:34, na...@jack.fr.eu.org wrote:
Before leaving Debian, things to think:
- will systemd be officialy the only system available ?
- if so, won't we get a way to bypass that ?
And one other thought... is it really that bad?
Personally I like it a lot better than sysV plus
Which leads me to ask - those of you running server farms - what
distros are popular these days, for server-side operations?
been running bsd forever. but moving to debian and ganeti, as bsd
does not host virtualization.
Simply not true; http://bhyve.org/
It is a bit immature compared to
Which leads me to ask - those of you running server farms - what
distros are popular these days, for server-side operations?
been running bsd forever. but moving to debian and ganeti, as bsd
does not host virtualization.
Simply not true; http://bhyve.org/
It is a bit immature compared
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 12:00:52PM +0100, Daniel Ankers wrote:
On 22 October 2014 11:34, na...@jack.fr.eu.org wrote:
Before leaving Debian, things to think:
- will systemd be officialy the only system available ?
- if so, won't we get a way to bypass that ?
And one other thought... is it
When it's working, no doupt, I'll be fine
I don't care (or just a few) about when it's working.
The point is: what about it's failure ?
On the ethical point of view, systemd is killed anyway
On 22/10/2014 13:00, Daniel Ankers wrote:
On 22 October 2014 11:34, na...@jack.fr.eu.org
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 6:12 AM, Joe Greco jgr...@ns.sol.net wrote:
when so much effort has been put into that very issue, specifically so
that we could gain the advantages of a BSD hypervisor that supported
ZFS natively...
[snip]
If you want native ZFS support, then Solaris x86-64+Zones+KVM
On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 12:34:17 +0200, na...@jack.fr.eu.org said:
Before leaving Debian, things to think:
- will systemd be officialy the only system available ?
- if so, won't we get a way to bypass that ?
Somebody already forked systemd at a point before it completely
lost the plot.
na...@jack.fr.eu.org wrote:
Before leaving Debian, things to think:
- will systemd be officialy the only system available ?
- if so, won't we get a way to bypass that ?
officially, there will be support for multiple init systems; in
practice, the installer doesn't provide an option, and
I'm reminded of the remark often attributed to DEC CEO Ken Olson,
roughly:
With VMS (their big complex OS) it might take hours searching
through manuals to find a feature you need while with Unix you can
determine in seconds that it is not available.
On October 21, 2014 at 16:10
On October 21, 2014 at 16:43 morrowc.li...@gmail.com (Christopher Morrow) wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 4:10 PM, Andrew Sullivan asulli...@dyn.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 03:11:55PM -0400, Barry Shein wrote:
But
for example some of my servers boot in seconds.
One is
On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:31:02 -0400, Barry Shein b...@world.std.com wrote:
Perhaps you don't remember the days when an fsck was
basically mandatory and could take 15-20 minutes on a large disk.
Journaling has all but done away with fsck. You'd have to go *way* back to
have systems that ran a
Which leads me to ask - those of you running server farms - what
distros are popular these days, for server-side operations? We've
been running Debian like forever (by way of Solaris and redhat) - but
this systemd thing is making me rethink things. Seems like an awful
lot of folks are now
On October 22, 2014 at 12:00 md1...@md1clv.com (Daniel Ankers) wrote:
On 22 October 2014 11:34, na...@jack.fr.eu.org wrote:
Before leaving Debian, things to think:
- will systemd be officialy the only system available ?
- if so, won't we get a way to bypass that ?
And one
Barry Schein:
I'm reminded of the remark often attributed to DEC CEO Ken Olson,
roughly:
With VMS (their big complex OS) it might take hours searching
through manuals to find a feature you need while with Unix you can
determine in seconds that it is not available.
and how did that
David Ford wrote:
Which leads me to ask - those of you running server farms - what
distros are popular these days, for server-side operations? We've
been running Debian like forever (by way of Solaris and redhat) - but
this systemd thing is making me rethink things. Seems like an awful
lot of
Which leads me to ask - those of you running server farms - what
distros are popular these days, for server-side operations? We've
been running Debian like forever (by way of Solaris and redhat) - but
this systemd thing is making me rethink things. Seems like an awful
lot of folks are now
the vast majority of negative tongue wagging regarding systemd is ill
informed.
can we skip the ad homina and leave that for the systemd dev fora?
does systemd have growing pains? definitely. are some egos involved?
sure. can systemd be far reaching? yes, is such reach mandated?
no. use
Randy Bush wrote:
the vast majority of negative tongue wagging regarding systemd is ill
informed.
can we skip the ad homina and leave that for the systemd dev fora?
does systemd have growing pains? definitely. are some egos involved?
sure. can systemd be far reaching? yes, is such reach
On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 19:35:51 -, David Ford said:
into a common bus. not everything in systemd is a requirement to run it.
just because a unit is offered for dhcp or ntp, doesn't mean you are
required to use it.
Actually, systemd 216 will cram systemd-timesyncd down your throat even
if you
Once upon a time, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu valdis.kletni...@vt.edu said:
Actually, systemd 216 will cram systemd-timesyncd down your throat even
if you had ntpd installed.
Yeah, I think a lot of the upset with systemd is not so much with the
core daemon that runs as PID 1, but with the massive
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Randy Bush ra...@psg.com wrote:
the vast majority of negative tongue wagging regarding systemd is ill
informed.
can we skip the ad homina and leave that for the systemd dev fora?
I don't think that it's an ad homina attack, as it's pretty clear that
many of
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 3:48 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 19:35:51 -, David Ford said:
into a common bus. not everything in systemd is a requirement to run it.
just because a unit is offered for dhcp or ntp, doesn't mean you are
required to use it.
Actually,
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 9:17 PM, Jeffrey Ollie j...@ocjtech.us wrote:
I think that Debian's plan to allow multiple init systems
(irregardless of which one is default) is a bad plan. The non-default
ones won't get any love - at some point they'll just stop working (or
indeed, work at
Bah, boot speed;
On my server, boot is slow down by hardware initialization.
The soft side is quite low.
But the point is not makes things faster from 15 to 14 sec is useless.
The point is : it's good, but at what price ?
As you said, there were many improvements over the past.
What was the
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:48 PM, na...@jack.fr.eu.org wrote:
Bah, boot speed;
On my server, boot is slow down by hardware initialization.
The soft side is quite low.
But the point is not makes things faster from 15 to 14 sec is useless.
The point is : it's good, but at what price ?
I
On 10/22/2014 06:01, Randy Bush wrote:
Which leads me to ask - those of you running server farms - what
distros are popular these days, for server-side operations?
been running bsd forever. but moving to debian and ganeti, as bsd
does not host virtualization.
Simply not true;
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:58 PM, Larry Sheldon larryshel...@cox.net wrote:
Now I have Thunderbird and Firefox--from people who are committed to the
notion that if it works, it must be replaced. If people like it, it must
be redesigned. If it is stable, it must be updated. If there is a
Joe Hamelin wrote:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:58 PM, Larry Sheldon larryshel...@cox.net wrote:
Now I have Thunderbird and Firefox--from people who are committed to the
notion that if it works, it must be replaced. If people like it, it must
be redesigned. If it is stable, it must be updated.
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Barry Shein b...@world.std.com wrote:
[snip]
The unix community has exerted great amounts of effort over the
decades to speed up reboot, particularly after crashes but also
planned. Perhaps you don't remember the days when an fsck was
basically mandatory and
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 9:48 PM, Jimmy Hess mysi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Barry Shein b...@world.std.com wrote:
And you whisk all that away with it's not really clear to me that
'reboots in seconds' is a think to be optimized
False dilemma.
[ snip ]
10
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 09:48:51PM -0500, Jimmy Hess wrote:
Optimizing reboot time down from 20 minutes to 1 minute is a
significantly meaningful improvement; it's literally a 85% reduction
in time spent during each boot process from the original time.
if reducing boot time from 20
On 10/22/2014 23:02, Jim Mercer wrote:
if reducing boot time from 20 minutes down to 1 minute, in a server environment,
is a serious issue for you, maybe you should be looking at why you need to
reboot so often?
That is the question I have been asking myself.
Back in the day we took it a a
On Wed, 22 Oct 2014, Larry Sheldon wrote:
That is the question I have been asking myself.
Back in the day we took it a a failure if a reboot happened. (I remember
discussions about needing to reboot to keep counters from overflowing. I
thought programming for counter wrap was a better
Ok. As a highly on- list-topic example of why distrust is called for...
Without referring to the systemd source code*, does anyone know what systemd
uses to select between networking subsystems (i.e. NetworkManager, the new
standard as of RHEL 7, vs /etc/ sysconfig/network-scripts/, etc.).
On 10/22/14 9:29 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote:
On 10/22/2014 23:02, Jim Mercer wrote:
if reducing boot time from 20 minutes down to 1 minute, in a server
environment,
is a serious issue for you, maybe you should be looking at why you
need to
reboot so often?
That is the question I have
I've done a fair amount of hand-to-hand combat with systemd.
When it's good it's good, tho not always apparent why it's good. But
for example some of my servers boot in seconds.
When it's bad it can be painful and incredibly opaque and a huge time
sink.
Googling for suggestions I've found
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 03:11:55PM -0400, Barry Shein wrote:
But
for example some of my servers boot in seconds.
One is reminded of a mail, included in the Preface to _The UNIX-HATERS
Handbook_, available at
http://www.art.net/~hopkins/Don/unix-haters/preface.html. Apparently,
things really
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 4:10 PM, Andrew Sullivan asulli...@dyn.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 03:11:55PM -0400, Barry Shein wrote:
But
for example some of my servers boot in seconds.
One is reminded of a mail, included in the Preface to _The UNIX-HATERS
Handbook_, available at
it's
Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 4:10 PM, Andrew Sullivan asulli...@dyn.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 03:11:55PM -0400, Barry Shein wrote:
But
for example some of my servers boot in seconds.
One is reminded of a mail, included in the Preface to _The UNIX-HATERS
G. Lugo israel.l...@lugosys.com
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 3:11:55 PM
Subject: Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]
I've done a fair amount of hand-to-hand combat with systemd.
When it's good it's good, tho not always apparent why it's good. But
for example some
- Original Message -
From: Capi c...@lugosys.com
On 10/21/2014 11:29 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
The thing that I don't understand about systemd is how it managed to
get
*EVERY SINGLE DISTRIBUTION'S RELEASE MANAGER* on board in less than
a year,
given how thoroughly it violates
On 21/10/14 23:55, Jay Ashworth wrote:
Ok, but how does it handle providing initscripts? I gather any upstreams
which used to provide them aren't anymore...
It's Gentoo: You should write your own is the most likely answer.
--
Tom
: concerns over systemd [OT]
I've done a fair amount of hand-to-hand combat with systemd.
When it's good it's good, tho not always apparent why it's good. But
for example some of my servers boot in seconds.
When it's bad it can be painful and incredibly opaque and a huge time
sink.
Googling
On 10/21/2014 11:55 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Capi c...@lugosys.com
Whoops, used the wrong alias to reply.
Not *every single* distribution...
I had meant to put an asterisk on that.
My remark was meant to be tongue-in-cheek :)
Ok, but how does it handle
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 18:29:44 -0400, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
The thing that I don't understand about systemd is how it managed to get
*EVERY SINGLE DISTRIBUTION'S RELEASE MANAGER* on board...
It's spelled Red Hat. Add in GNOME and debian (et. al.) is backed into a
corner. Red
On 10/21/2014 11:59 PM, Tom Hill wrote:
On 21/10/14 23:55, Jay Ashworth wrote:
Ok, but how does it handle providing initscripts? I gather any upstreams
which used to provide them aren't anymore...
It's Gentoo: You should write your own is the most likely answer.
Actually, not at all;
Israel G. Lugo wrote:
On 10/21/2014 11:59 PM, Tom Hill wrote:
On 21/10/14 23:55, Jay Ashworth wrote:
Ok, but how does it handle providing initscripts? I gather any upstreams
which used to provide them aren't anymore...
It's Gentoo: You should write your own is the most likely answer.
On 22/10/14 00:57, Israel G. Lugo wrote:
Gentoo is about flexibility and choice. It's got a steepish learning
curve, yes, but the documentation is very good; sadly, much of it was
lost a few years ago, due to a bad mishap on the community Gentoo Wiki
server, apparently without any backups.
- Original Message -
From: Ricky Beam jfb...@gmail.com
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 18:29:44 -0400, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com
wrote:
The thing that I don't understand about systemd is how it managed to
get *EVERY SINGLE DISTRIBUTION'S RELEASE MANAGER* on board...
It's spelled Red
71 matches
Mail list logo
