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 0DC1A1389E2 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2014 12:20:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9A040E0B14; Mon, 24 Nov 2014 12:20:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ie0-f169.google.com (mail-ie0-f169.google.com [209.85.223.169]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 607CDE0AF9 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2014 12:20:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ie0-f169.google.com with SMTP id y20so8641355ier.14 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2014 04:20:49 -0800 (PST) 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=P03JIwX2R5a7rkLbrIH0Yy2ddOS9zB1uXxM0XySX+Ps=; b=mAyyuXWKGaKkEDtuMs/E8blp3YV/hepsJ29JlUvZZtE9owKUnqOeGrX44pGjNg7UH9 vTiajIngiR9+k0AVeDk4WazJUlCIdLlRsKrharuokRpgS5nI0aJoO9k4dV/MEgn/ATKA zBJHLalNR3NZ9ZcnWu2k3Trbo8Y8NS5HqVVQruYR9RzqmLwb+8wiU0WwHqH58WeV0lr0 CvKtmjqdy3/1q+JJ7Uz/TNCYfbRsqm3+aeuYci7x84B61PIJA2P1mjCBQflmvInXTwH7 Zuk2rqwr0IBfF4y+QiLPe1hIttYFt5CG+Qr+PGUnYGZKU+pD5Iuk9NYxoW0qBrgAHSwu vW9g== 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 X-Received: by 10.50.79.135 with SMTP id j7mr11055965igx.14.1416831649591; Mon, 24 Nov 2014 04:20:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.64.120.228 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Nov 2014 04:20:49 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <546EE70C.2050506@yourstruly.sx> <20141121230421.51204830@marcec.fritz.box> Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 06:20:49 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now From: Sid S To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0122a7542e35db050899d375 X-Archives-Salt: 46a03a41-50ec-4be8-a4fa-b3dfb72110d3 X-Archives-Hash: 77de0fd085f5d2da1898d42884b15270 --089e0122a7542e35db050899d375 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Regardless, it would probably be useful to contact the people from the Debian project who were interested in forking it. It's likely Gentoo would end up using a fair amount of their work at some point. On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 6:18 AM, Sid S wrote: > The reason this question is so hard to answer is because it is not a > technical question, it is a moral and ethical one. The links presented > start to approach the issue being discussed in this light but do not > entirely accept the right question. I suspect this is because it seems > rather absurd. > > We shall analyze some popular responses in this light. > > Systemd is easy to work around! > http://www.vitavonni.de/blog/201410/2014102101-avoiding-systemd.html > except, > https://lobste.rs/s/y5skqt/avoiding_systemd_isn_t_hard/comments/eayjn3#c_= eayjn3 > but http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html gives some > decent counterpoints, > which http://lwn.net/Articles/619992/ either supports or is ambivalent > about. > > They all basically boil down to "someone is doing the work, and if it is = a > better way to do it it will be okay." Except this isn't true. The proof b= y > contradiction is exceptionally simple: > > If this was a just world, Lennart's pants would be on fire. > Lennart's pants are not on fire. > Therefore, this is not a just world, and justice must be manufactured. > > You might ask why his pants (and the pants of most systemd supporters) > would be on fire. Well, > https://pappp.net/?p=3D969 clearly explains how FLOS is not UNIX, and > the easy counterpoints get thoroughly trashed > http://lwn.net/Articles/440843/, and > http://blog.lusis.org/blog/2014/11/20/systemd-redux/ here's a guy > agreeing and suggesting everyone hit the big red EJECT. > > Why UNIX? Well, because that's just a concise, easy-to-phrase proxy for > the deeper issue of > > https://pay.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/2k5b7e/the_concern_isnt_that_syst= emd_itself_isnt/ > (aside: read the C++ in the kernel tangent if you are not familiar, it > seems to mirror this argument taking place and notably, Linus has chosen = a > side on that one!) > which is echoed here http://lwn.net/Articles/440843/ > and here http://lwn.net/Articles/576078/ > and here http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/ (start with > unix philosophy) > and here http://lwn.net/Articles/494605/. > > Once upon a time I met a very masterful troll who got me to say precisely > what I needed to say precisely when I did not want to say it. What he got > me to say was: > >Oct 27 06:05:30 <*******> I study the orthodoxy consistently[sic] > >Oct 27 06:05:38 To find its flaws, yes > > So did Lennart &co. study the orthodox to learn from its failures? Did > they construct a conservative (re)implementation of the software exhibiti= ng > those failures? It has been shown and continues to be shown that: no, the= y > are flying by the seat of their pants. A solution could have been > constructed which requires far less labor. Not only far less of *their* > labor, but far less labor for *everyone else* using a *nix. But they did > not thoroughly investigate such avenues, even within their > reimplementation! They are recreating bugs! It is impossible for them to > claim they are doing it over to do it right, as they have already failed = at > that purpose. > > They have been shown to have wasted effort and continue to do so. When > labor is scarce, that is the most unethical action one can undertake. > > > On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Marc Joliet wrote: > >> Am Fri, 21 Nov 2014 01:32:16 -0600 >> schrieb Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9s : >> >> [...] >> > I highly recommend the article John Corbet wrote for LWN a week ago: >> > >> > http://lwn.net/Articles/619992/ >> [...] >> >> Thanks for the link, it was a good read. >> >> FWIW, I found this linked in one of the comments: >> >> http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/ >> >> Both articles echo thoughts that I have more and more with every >> "discussion" >> regarding systemd. >> >> My takeaway is similar to that of the lwn.net article (that is, both >> sides are >> being unnecessarily thick-headed), and find it remarkable how much I >> recognise >> from "discussions" here on gentoo-user (in contrast, gentoo-amd64 has >> been much >> more level-headed). However, I disagree with with the categorisation at >> the >> end, mainly because I hate it when people have to sort each other into >> "camps", >> so that they know who to hate and who to like (which isn't the author's >> fault, >> I think, politicised discussions tend to go that way as they intensify), >> but >> also because I think it is too strict and doesn't account for overlap (f= or >> myself I see reasons for both being and not being in either group). >> >> Greetings >> -- >> Marc Joliet >> -- >> "People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know >> we >> don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup >> > > --089e0122a7542e35db050899d375 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Regardless, it would probably be useful to contact the peo= ple from the Debian project who were interested in forking it. It's lik= ely Gentoo would end up using a fair amount of their work at some point.

On Mon, No= v 24, 2014 at 6:18 AM, Sid S <r030t1@gmail.com> wrote:
=
The reason this question is so hard= to answer is because it is not a technical question, it is a moral and eth= ical one. The links presented start to approach the issue being discussed i= n this light but do not entirely accept the right question. I suspect this = is because it seems rather absurd.

We shall analyze some popul= ar responses in this light.

Systemd is easy to work around! http://www.vitavonni.de/blog/201410/2014102101-avoidi= ng-systemd.html
except, htt= ps://lobste.rs/s/y5skqt/avoiding_systemd_isn_t_hard/comments/eayjn3#c_eayjn= 3
but http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-= myths.html gives some decent counterpoints,
which http://lwn.net/Articles/6= 19992/ either supports or is ambivalent about.

They all ba= sically boil down to "someone is doing the work, and if it is a better= way to do it it will be okay." Except this isn't true. The proof = by contradiction is exceptionally simple:

If this was a just w= orld, Lennart's pants would be on fire.
Lennart's pants ar= e not on fire.
Therefore, this is not a just world, and justice must be = manufactured.

You might ask why his pants (and the pants of mo= st systemd supporters) would be on fire. Well,
https://pappp.net/?p=3D969 clearly expl= ains how FLOS is not UNIX, and
the easy counterpoints get thoroughly tra= shed http://l= wn.net/Articles/440843/, and
http://blog.lusis.org/blog/2014= /11/20/systemd-redux/ here's a guy agreeing and suggesting everyone= hit the big red EJECT.

Why UNIX? Well, because that's jus= t a concise, easy-to-phrase proxy for the deeper issue of
https://pay.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/2k5b= 7e/the_concern_isnt_that_systemd_itself_isnt/ (aside: read the C++ in t= he kernel tangent if you are not familiar, it seems to mirror this argument= taking place and notably, Linus has chosen a side on that one!)
w= hich is echoed here http://lwn.net/Articles/440843/
and here http://lwn.net/Articles/576= 078/
and here http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemd= AntiSystemd/ (start with unix philosophy)
and here http://lwn.net/Articles/= 494605/.

=
Once upon a time I met a very masterful troll who got me to say precis= ely what I needed to say precisely when I did not want to say it. What he g= ot me to say was:
>Oct 27 06:05:30 <*******>=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 = I study the orthodoxy consistently[sic]
>Oct 27 06:05:38 <R0b0t1`= >=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 To find its flaws, yes

So did Lenn= art &co. study the orthodox to learn from its failures? Did they constr= uct a conservative (re)implementation of the software exhibiting those fail= ures? It has been shown and continues to be shown that: no, they are flying= by the seat of their pants. A solution could have been constructed which r= equires far less labor. Not only far less of their labor, but far le= ss labor for everyone else using a *nix. But they did not thoroughly= investigate such avenues, even within their reimplementation! They are rec= reating bugs! It is impossible for them to claim they are doing it over to = do it right, as they have already failed at that purpose.

They have been shown to have wasted effort and continue to do so. When lab= or is scarce, that is the most unethical action one can undertake.


On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Marc J= oliet <marcec@gmx.de> wrote:
A= m Fri, 21 Nov 2014 01:32:16 -0600
schrieb Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9s <caneko@gmail.com>:

[...]
> I highly recommend the article John Corbet wrote for LWN a week = ago:
>
> http://l= wn.net/Articles/619992/
[...]

Thanks for the link, it was a good read.

FWIW, I found this linked in one of the comments:

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/<= /a>

Both articles echo thoughts that I have more and more with every "disc= ussion"
regarding systemd.

My takeaway is similar to that of the lwn.net article (that is, both sides are
being unnecessarily thick-headed), and find it remarkable how much I recogn= ise
from "discussions" here on gentoo-user (in contrast, gentoo-amd64= has been much
more level-headed).=C2=A0 However, I disagree with with the categorisation = at the
end, mainly because I hate it when people have to sort each other into &quo= t;camps",
so that they know who to hate and who to like (which isn't the author&#= 39;s fault,
I think, politicised discussions tend to go that way as they intensify), bu= t
also because I think it is too strict and doesn't account for overlap (= for
myself I see reasons for both being and not being in either group).

Greetings
--
Marc Joliet
--
"People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who kn= ow we
don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup


--089e0122a7542e35db050899d375--