From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10E3C13838B for ; Mon, 22 Sep 2014 20:08:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 34D54E0869; Mon, 22 Sep 2014 20:08:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qa0-f45.google.com (mail-qa0-f45.google.com [209.85.216.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21632E0833 for ; Mon, 22 Sep 2014 20:08:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qa0-f45.google.com with SMTP id k15so660130qaq.32 for ; Mon, 22 Sep 2014 13:08:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=O4C14evUlQHykkwsHQ1XnDaJVdR+rRrq4pZi+6OvR8k=; b=ZuWlEK5ZoDH4t0sdPCzNgoLTS8i70ZX+rFBYLxn/UDqg2tdGX22KzcH/AfpLJtFLo2 qHqaNCAKAR6rPYmZC4yD8YOEIahvaieO/Cwg552dVIydf35W2gATh3wggpJ38JgzfQ20 DBYZbq3ZEbMnZKN+zB3qcDC0G27rEhXurBjtFLO4MMH1QqHK3LSL3GniPKcnrkYmfSLC d0xq06mfNWMJXE+HBgapuaj6D255r2m5wQGWIskR1hk+Rp8QcyHUHgLNJ8yBeUdA9oQL A2K3gA7AbkXBna2oLdS6qBuRjKdisX6FlIBkE16goDjWvfSDPlI1anptp3gI4jDmeSX6 CDzA== Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.28.201 with SMTP id n9mr13480547qac.81.1411416480344; Mon, 22 Sep 2014 13:08:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.96.182.68 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Sep 2014 13:08:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20140921132548.d4ad54724473a2aeee688daa@comcast.net> <20140921143059.c3c16dfdeab6f65280b7caa6@comcast.net> <20140921192043.GA9652@crud> <20140921171301.5f008b3bd12c21c2f8fdd67e@comcast.net> <20140921202600.08d082d88014228172007477@comcast.net> <20140922175846.GA22399@crud> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 16:08:00 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Boycott Systemd From: Harry Holt To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c35ab0f0efd20503ad012e X-Archives-Salt: 844b0e9f-59ad-4787-ab51-b8380aae33cc X-Archives-Hash: d7aef54bed4109b2ff096805794906e3 --001a11c35ab0f0efd20503ad012e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Canek Pel=E1ez Vald=E9s wrote: > On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Barry Schwartz > wrote: > > Lie Ryan skribis: > >> Diversity isn't about feeding people who feels everything not-invented > >> here is godawful. When you have a clearly defined problem and you can > >> create a solution that satisfies that niche better than any other > >> solutions, that is diversity. > > > > 'Diversity' here is deviation from established Unix/POSIX philosophy > > in system design. Years of effort to simplify programming are being > > thrown away on grounds that resemble common arguments in favor of the > > 'tight integration' that is Microsoft Windows. I mean, seriously, many > > of the pro-systemd arguments are like those I have heard for using > > Windows: that applications 'just work', because they were written for > > a dominant system. > > > > But I view this like a programmer, not like a Windows user; I want my > > software to be portable because it is written portably (in a POSIX > > sense), not because it is written for a universally available > > particular POSIX variant. What I see is something like a return to the > > days when you had to write different code for variants of USG, BSD, > > and whatnot, except that now, unlike then, one of the variants is > > overwhelmingly dominant. > > > > What I really fear, though, is what if one day the kernel team is a > > different entity, more like other entities in the Linux world? > > As a professional programmer, I completely disagree with any dogma > based on "philosophy" rather than technical merits. I will not rehash > here the same discussion we have had several times in gentoo-user, so > I will just paste what Linus recently had to say about "the > traditional unix"[1]. > > "So I think many of the "original ideals" of UNIX are these days more > of a mindset issue than necessarily reflecting reality of the > situation. > > "There's still value in understanding the traditional UNIX "do one > thing and do it well" model where many workflows can be done as a > pipeline of simple tools each adding their own value, but let's face > it, it's not how complex systems really work, and it's not how major > applications have been working or been designed for a long time. It's > a useful simplification, and it's still true at *some* level, but I > think it's also clear that it doesn't really describe most of reality. > > "It might describe some particular case, though, and I do think it's a > useful teaching tool. People obviously still do those traditional > pipelines of processes and file descriptors that UNIX is perhaps > associated with, but there's a *lot* of cases where you have big > complex unified systems." > > Let me emphasize the important part: > > "There's still value in understanding the traditional UNIX [...] model > [...], but let's face it, it's not how complex systems really work". > > So, I'm sorry, but if I'm going to take a programmer's word, is going > to be Linus over almost anyone else. And to quote Rob Pike: "Not only > is UNIX dead, it's starting to smell really bad." > > Regards. > > [1] > http://www.itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/65402-torvalds-says-he= -has-no-strong-opinions-on-systemd > -- > Canek Pel=E1ez Vald=E9s > Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias > Universidad Nacional Aut=F3noma de M=E9xico > > You left out a few gems from Linus. I already posted Linus' rant about some of the major failings of systemd and its developers - there are some issues he brings up in his article that you still refuse to acknowledge as major short-comings: "I don't actually have any particularly strong opinions on systemd itself. I've had issues with some of the core developers that I think are much too cavalier about bugs and compatibility, and I think some of the design details are insane (I dislike the binary logs, for example), but those are details, not big issues." "Now, I'm still old-fashioned enough that I like my log-files in text, not binary, so I think sometimes systemd hasn't necessarily had the best of taste, but hey, details.." But of course, actions speak louder than words. Linus may have explained why he kicked Kay Sievers out of the kernel maintainers, but if he did, it wasn't included in the edited transcript. --001a11c35ab0f0efd20503ad012e Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Canek Pel= =E1ez Vald=E9s <caneko@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, = Sep 22, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Barry Schwartz
<chemoelectric@chemoe= lectric.org> wrote:
> Lie Ryan <lie.1296@gmail.com<= /a>> skribis:
>> Diversity isn't about feeding people who feels everything not-= invented
>> here is godawful. When you have a clearly defined problem and you = can
>> create a solution that satisfies that niche better than any other<= br> >> solutions, that is diversity.
>
> ‘Diversity’ here is deviation from established Unix/POSIX = philosophy
> in system design. Years of effort to simplify programming are being > thrown away on grounds that resemble common arguments in favor of the<= br> > ‘tight integration’ that is Microsoft Windows. I mean, ser= iously, many
> of the pro-systemd arguments are like those I have heard for using
> Windows: that applications ‘just work’, because they were = written for
> a dominant system.
>
> But I view this like a programmer, not like a Windows user; I want my<= br> > software to be portable because it is written portably (in a POSIX
> sense), not because it is written for a universally available
> particular POSIX variant. What I see is something like a return to the=
> days when you had to write different code for variants of USG, BSD, > and whatnot, except that now, unlike then, one of the variants is
> overwhelmingly dominant.
>
> What I really fear, though, is what if one day the kernel team is a > different entity, more like other entities in the Linux world?

As a professional programmer, I completely disagree with any do= gma
based on "philosophy" rather than technical merits. I will not re= hash
here the same discussion we have had several times in gentoo-user, so
I will just paste what Linus recently had to say about "the
traditional unix"[1].

"So I think many of the "original ideals" of UNIX are these = days more
of a mindset issue than necessarily reflecting reality of the
situation.

"There's still value in understanding the traditional UNIX "d= o one
thing and do it well" model where many workflows can be done as a
pipeline of simple tools each adding their own value, but let's face it, it's not how complex systems really work, and it's not how majo= r
applications have been working or been designed for a long time. It's a useful simplification, and it's still true at *some* level, but I
think it's also clear that it doesn't really describe most of reali= ty.

"It might describe some particular case, though, and I do think it'= ;s a
useful teaching tool. People obviously still do those traditional
pipelines of processes and file descriptors that UNIX is perhaps
associated with, but there's a *lot* of cases where you have big
complex unified systems."

Let me emphasize the important part:

"There's still value in understanding the traditional UNIX [...] m= odel
[...], but let's face it, it's not how complex systems really work&= quot;.

So, I'm sorry, but if I'm going to take a programmer's word, is= going
to be Linus over almost anyone else. And to quote Rob Pike: "Not only<= br> is UNIX dead, it’s starting to smell really bad."

Regards.

[1] http://w= ww.itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/65402-torvalds-says-he-has-no-st= rong-opinions-on-systemd
--
Canek Pel=E1ez Vald=E9s
Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias
Universidad Nacional Aut=F3noma de M=E9xico


You left out a few gems fr= om Linus.  I already posted Linus' rant about some of the major fa= ilings of systemd and its developers - there are some issues he brings up i= n his article that you still refuse to acknowledge as major short-comings:<= br>
"I don't actually have any particularly strong opinions on = systemd=20 itself. I've had issues with some of the core developers that I think= =20 are much too cavalier about bugs and compatibility, and I think some of=20 the design details are insane (I dislike the binary logs, for example),=20 but those are details, not big issues."

"Now, I'm stil= l old-fashioned enough that I like my log-files in text,=20 not binary, so I think sometimes systemd hasn't necessarily had the bes= t of taste, but hey, details.."

But of course, action= s speak louder than words.  Linus may have explained why he kicked Kay= Sievers out of the kernel maintainers, but if he did, it wasn't includ= ed in the edited transcript.



--001a11c35ab0f0efd20503ad012e--