Re: [MLUG] What a fight ! The spectacular side of systemd :-)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 -- re-post to luv-main FYI -- On 12/10/2014 4:59 PM, Timothy Rice wrote:
I guess if the kernel becomes inextricably bound to systemd, then gentoo will be forced to switch. This would make gentoo less favourable as an alternative for people seeking to escape systemd, and might furthermore drive away existing gentoo users. I suppose all these people would switch to FreeBSD. Would that be so bad?
For Debian people, an easier migration path that seems very viable today will be kFreeBSD -- and then if that goes seriously bad too, it is a closer step to FreeBSD (at least a little bit closer). This penned as possible news on kFreeBSD for upcoming publicity: https://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2014/10/msg00146.html - "GNU/kFreeBSD "bits", publicity, status report" - - following on thread of "kFreeBSD future" https://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2014/09/msg00280.html In a nutshell: MATE, not gnome no systemd, freedesktop.org sysvinit, potentially OpenRC later consolekit patched 90% compiled base very usable desktop (not just for servers) I've got to specifically quote this small, but important /delicate/ section of Steven Chamberlain message: <quote> * (delicately!) mention init system, still being a hot topic - no udev or systemd here; I guess that makes us a "traditional" Debian flavour, UNIX-like and POSIX-focused - we did lose GNOME (I think mainly due to logind, but also libgbm) - otherwise, we seem to have all we need; Robert fixed up consolekit - we chose to keep sysvinit as default, but are in a position to easily use alternate init systems; OpenRC looks promising for the future (perhaps usable already?); I guess file-rc still works </quote> *Much* progress from Wheezy, very promising future. A. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) iF4EAREIAAYFAlQ6cZkACgkQqBZry7fv4vvJbwEAxAtpPMBqACDd3vSFXuv6H6zQ Drw9TYUKozXny0Oq9x0A+weQ9HtfVA9bCCC70Y1fA31phCn37npBfboOSXJVN9oq =f702 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Andrew McGlashan writes:
For Debian people, an easier migration path that seems very viable today will be kFreeBSD
"We remain gravely concerned about the viability of this port. [...] the port is in danger of being dropped from Jessie, and [we] invite any porters who are able to commit to working on the port in the long term to make themselves known *now*." https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2014/09/msg00002.html
On 13/10/2014 1:07 PM, Trent W. Buck wrote:
Andrew McGlashan writes:
For Debian people, an easier migration path that seems very viable today will be kFreeBSD
"We remain gravely concerned about the viability of this port. [...] the port is in danger of being dropped from Jessie, and [we] invite any porters who are able to commit to working on the port in the long term to make themselves known *now*."
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2014/09/msg00002.html
Well, that was an /old/ report, it certainly looks like kFreeBSD is in a really healthy state and is really moving forward very well since that news announcement. I'll re-post the rest of what I wrote, be sure to read through the whole message from Steven Chamberlain, at least he has empathy for the problems of systemd. This penned as possible news on kFreeBSD for upcoming publicity: https://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2014/10/msg00146.html - "GNU/kFreeBSD "bits", publicity, status report" - - following on thread of "kFreeBSD future" https://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2014/09/msg00280.html In a nutshell: MATE, not gnome no systemd, freedesktop.org sysvinit, potentially OpenRC later consolekit patched 90% compiled base very usable desktop (not just for servers) I've got to specifically quote this small, but important /delicate/ section of Steven Chamberlain message: <quote> * (delicately!) mention init system, still being a hot topic - no udev or systemd here; I guess that makes us a "traditional" Debian flavour, UNIX-like and POSIX-focused - we did lose GNOME (I think mainly due to logind, but also libgbm) - otherwise, we seem to have all we need; Robert fixed up consolekit - we chose to keep sysvinit as default, but are in a position to easily use alternate init systems; OpenRC looks promising for the future (perhaps usable already?); I guess file-rc still works </quote> *Much* progress from Wheezy, very promising future. A.
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 08:05:22 PM Andrew McGlashan wrote:
Well, that was an /old/ report
Where old = 17 days ago, and is the most recent report from the release team. So I'd say it's in trouble unless they've managed to get more people involved rapidly.. -- Chris Samuel : http://www.csamuel.org/ : Melbourne, VIC
On 13/10/2014 9:53 PM, Chris Samuel wrote:
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 08:05:22 PM Andrew McGlashan wrote:
Well, that was an /old/ report
Where old = 17 days ago, and is the most recent report from the release team.
Okay, so not so old, but it is dated already as I understand -- some news is good for a minute, other news for a year and other news anywhere in between or far beyond -- some news is even old news by the time it is presented (that happens regularly).
So I'd say it's in trouble unless they've managed to get more people involved rapidly..
Well, i17 day old news item was jumped on too quickly and the responses since that news item show that there is not likely going to be a problem for the port with much progress being made; maybe they still need more people to get involved, but that is very likely to happen as a consequence of systemd alone. If you consider kFreeBSD as being Debian userland without the possibility of systemd inclusion ... there is now potential for a much greater army to help [in all sorts of ways]. And to make a move to kFreeBSD even better, we'll get native ZFS too. A.
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:19:45 PM Andrew McGlashan wrote:
Okay, so not so old, but it is dated already as I understand
We'll see after November 1st when the release team makes their yes/no decision on whether their concerns have been addressed. It would be nice for it to survive, irrespective of the reasons why. -- Chris Samuel : http://www.csamuel.org/ : Melbourne, VIC
Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@affinityvision.com.au> writes:
On 13/10/2014 1:07 PM, Trent W. Buck wrote:
"We remain gravely concerned about the viability of this port. [...] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2014/09/msg00002.html Well, that was an /old/ report, [...] I'll re-post the rest of what I wrote, [...] https://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2014/10/msg00146.html
Mea culpa; I didn't realize that your cite was later than my cite :-)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 14/10/2014 10:53 AM, Trent W. Buck wrote:
Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@affinityvision.com.au> writes:
On 13/10/2014 1:07 PM, Trent W. Buck wrote:
"We remain gravely concerned about the viability of this port. [...] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2014/09/msg00002.html
Well, that was an /old/ report, [...] I'll re-post the rest of what I wrote, [...] https://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2014/10/msg00146.html
Mea culpa; I didn't realize that your cite was later than my cite :-)
I don't think it is that clear cut yet, so I'm actually trying to get some kind of indication as to the actual status, rather than what can be perceived by that later post. This is my post to that cause: https://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2014/10/msg00217.html Thanks A. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) iF4EAREIAAYFAlQ8Z8gACgkQqBZry7fv4vv4gQEAtm3pbpWIclWSnIoKZazte883 bW9DeihqjM0S5PMEfasA/j21EMxp5WsrvBjipTD4JSVCpCp4ovlEiUmQZoHItlg1 =ipCL -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
participants (3)
-
Andrew McGlashan -
Chris Samuel -
trentbuck＠gmail.com