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 57C00138BF3 for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 07:02:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D8000E0A6F; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 07:02:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from forward4o.mail.yandex.net (forward4o.mail.yandex.net [37.140.190.33]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 385A2E0A6A for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 07:02:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp3o.mail.yandex.net (smtp3o.mail.yandex.net [37.140.190.28]) by forward4o.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id B01085640FAD for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 11:02:03 +0400 (MSK) Received: from smtp3o.mail.yandex.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp3o.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id 8B95E1E12EF for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 11:02:03 +0400 (MSK) Received: from unknown (unknown [91.233.55.8]) by smtp3o.mail.yandex.net (nwsmtp/Yandex) with ESMTPSA id IL1ZhxtojF-22X0n2CK; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 11:02:03 +0400 (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client certificate not present) X-Yandex-Uniq: 921453e0-fe04-492d-94ae-8eee0ec8fdd1 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail; t=1392620523; bh=zYhWGItlxAWF6+OjaXNEdCQ+EwjnqPMpHjG83SMnmi4=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:Subject: References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=a2JtRGSJv/lEueHE7pSrka1nxJosH5JEuCFcin/aLQBfUpW8GLhCs4b+d1pCoSuq1 uijtfANkLPTHj9gemtyw9hwW/PT7xYKo9FC3Ck70iC5cU434+4f8tDZLhMXP7KU0F+ pxgwX1ZkZuvAU2NzUYIHNyInq6bXGqS9LXlHjzTw= Authentication-Results: smtp3o.mail.yandex.net; dkim=pass header.i=@yandex.ru Message-ID: <5301B3E1.3000007@yandex.ru> Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 11:01:53 +0400 From: "Yuri K. Shatroff" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie References: <52FF84CE.2050301@libertytrek.org> <52FF9D58.3000608@libertytrek.org> <201402152023.10543.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> <5300DD51.5060207@libertytrek.org> <53010ADB.2070708@yandex.ru> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: aa1a8d82-8327-46b8-89bc-c62fec939f7a X-Archives-Hash: 8d8fba3af76866b1322120eaa9e6082b 17.02.2014 00:19, Canek Peláez Valdés пишет: > On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Yuri K. Shatroff wrote: > [ snip ] >> Isn't there too many "if you believe" and "if you agree"? A church of >> systemd? ;) > > As I said to Tanstaafl, it gets kind of philosophical. Even religious. > Technically, systemd is the obvious superior choice, and that's why > the TC voted for it in Debian (read the discussion). Oh I have read so many discussions already... :) To me, systemd's technical superiority is far not obvious. Just another init system would be, but as long as systemd is much more that one, I can't say that. It should NOT be compared to OpenRC / upstart alone, rather to a whole bunch of tools it replaces, and probably even those it's ambitious to replace. >> I wonder why all systemd's fancy stuff hasn't yet been integrated into any >> existing init system, because of theoretical impossibility or just practical >> uselessness? > > If it's "practically useless", why so many distributions keep choosing > it? Why GNOME started using it? Well, I said that technical superiority matters little for maintainers; what matters is money. If I'd write some super-puper fancy init system and kernel replacement, who would be interested? It's not the time of Linus' rise, now you don't deal with USENET freaks, but with Intel, RedHat and other billionaire corps. Do you have the guts and means to keep up with competitors, even not about kernel/init subsystems, but a user app like mailer/browser/messenger... A kernel subsystem requires much more technical competence to maintain and is far more critical for functioning, so much more important here is not any 'technical superiority' but simply resources, human and financial, spared if using RH-maintained systemd. >> Actually why not do the daemon management, logging, cron etc in the Linux >> kernel itself? It's obvious, and we even have a perfect example of >> kernel-integrated graphics around -- `guess the OS name`. It also has much >> in common with systemd; "Believe us it's the best OS", "Believe us it >> provides loads of features", "Agree with having binary logs" etc. > > All the software is libre; with only that any comparison to Microsoft > becomes moot. Once you mentioned "technical superiority", let's compare other stuff technically too. :) >> A competent approach for choosing software for a task is answering the >> questions: >> 1. Is the software standards-compliant? >> 2. Does the software have an alternative compatible implementation? >> 3. Is the software developed to achieve a certain, concrete goal? >> 4. Does the software achieve the goal? >> 5. Does the software achieve the goal "gracefully"? >> 6. Does the software have a clear perspective and view what it will be like? >> 7. Is the software developed and maintained by a reliable company or group? > > That's *your* approach. It's certainly not my approach: I don't care > if Emacs is "standards-compliant" (whatever that means for a text > editor); I don't care if Inkscape has an alternative compatible > implementation; and for the rest of your questions, my answer would be > yes. You don't care about Emacs and Inkscape but do you care the same nought about e.g. /bin/cp, /bin/mv etc? Do you care that your browser talks HTTP rather than SHiTP? Do you care that once after a couple of years your systems get unmaintained and unmaintainable because the software on them becomes a load of bashed up crap which only a world's head lennart can deal with? Well, you'll say that red hat tralala, but we've seen the rise and fall of many giants e.g. Sun with their once 'technically superior' Solaris and SPARCs, well one can name many I just don't have time, also we seen MySQL bought by Oracle, and all. Nothing is eternal, and it's (Again!) quite not always technical matters that matters. >> AFAICT, with systemd there's by far one "yes". The other answers are dubious >> if just plain "no". > > From your point of view. > >> I'd personally share Alan McKinnon's POV: there's no real reason to switch >> to systemd since the present init systems serve pretty well and the benefit, >> if any, isn't worth the adaptation threshold. > > That's fine; you don't have to use systemd. But if (as an extreme and > unlikely example), Gentoo decided to switch exclusively to systemd, > then either someone willing and able would need to come out ant start > maintaining the alternatives, or then you should do it. At present, no. But the trend is clear. > That's how free software works. Actually, free software (one you don't pay for) works like any other software you pay for. You probably wanted to say "that's how the OSS model works" but it's getting less and less true. The OSS model in many cases retains only its open source. Take MySQL, take KDE, take GNOME. Who cares about users? We do what we deem feasible regardless if you like it or not. Don't like it? C'mon, fork, it's free. C'mon, it's technically superior. C'mon, who are you? An admin? A programmer? A Bachelor/PhD? Ha, man, we're BILLIONAIRES. That says it. We GRANT you our software AS IS. And its source. And its bugtrackers. We make business by the fact that we have millions of free testers 'round the world. We can afford that. If you can afford forking and maintaining, c'mon man. >> But why then is Linux drifting to systemd? The answer is simple: money. Time >> is money. You have to support two init systems -> twice the time, twice the >> money. Sooner or later, a sum of money will outweigh the users' opinion. To >> be a realist, one has to admit that in near future 90% of new distro >> versions will be systemd-based. Unless some green soxx emerge and take over >> Red Hat... > > I don't think neither time nor money had to do with Debian's (nor > Arch's, nor OpenSuse's, nor Maegia's, nor Sabayon's) decision. It's not in terms "think" or "don't think". It's a fact. > It's just technically superior. But's that's just my opinion, and what > I believe ;) That's a good thing to believe in. It's hard to prove, hard to see, impossible to test all cases. Money is what you don't believe in. You either have it enough or not. > So, amen? :D Amen. :D > Regards. > -- Regards, Yuri K. Shatroff