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 E8F64138BF3 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 15:02:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 132F6E0B27; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 15:02:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-la0-f47.google.com (mail-la0-f47.google.com [209.85.215.47]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97D8AE0AE2 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 15:02:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-la0-f47.google.com with SMTP id hr17so12325816lab.34 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 07:02:43 -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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=QdGAUmPyJyid898Z9BX5otIyU5uAXtFNbV0/gV1Qy/U=; b=cSrH+rQFOn8lKfrSLasAeHabA1zBgRg1egyQ1E5DxusNmLJcBbDbEJkX8MM0SdUZaz 5vbwlWJWSrjHEMN9dl/77/q/ZuCYNYrZOlKZ/YHrLKGxNfuBJDKxRXOu30YGGI9dAO7P O4Op9Pjb4PHf0XrWauyMMHMCsHHWMzVExT0sgKPbeCfA/EJ0gBIGRVQvpnW8LgOSFNcZ m5Psgi1IrJ6FNzFnl89rculZkyMPE2+nC7WkV44ecew4j3XRc+feF/ApJMDAD3HbEFnX eHozr3i+I1Um4seN/EQxvaiik2GXjTtWPUEUxz5YUyE+68uBg3+cAnAhtIliY6C3QpQX 0OTA== 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 10.112.200.201 with SMTP id ju9mr56762lbc.76.1392735762957; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 07:02:42 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.170.67 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 07:02:42 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20140218153519.ac92e6f3bafdc75519e9f0d2@gmail.com> References: <52FF84CE.2050301@libertytrek.org> <53010ADB.2070708@yandex.ru> <201402161926.17796.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> <5301FDF0.6000408@libertytrek.org> <530254DA.4070306@yandex.ru> <20140218153519.ac92e6f3bafdc75519e9f0d2@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 09:02:42 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie From: =?UTF-8?B?Q2FuZWsgUGVsw6FleiBWYWxkw6lz?= To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: eb5e0862-9642-450a-9848-079703fd170d X-Archives-Hash: d7ef130aead7cae6512bb92ea70d1cbb On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 5:35 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote= : > On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 19:09:40 -0600 Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9s wrote: >> > How Integrated? The TCP/IP stack *is* integrated. But it is *protocol* >> > integration, *standards* integration not *software* integration. You d= o want >> > tight integration where it just can't work otherwise, but the design o= f Unix >> > provides (well, again repeating this), and almost any robust design sh= ould >> > provide, the ignorance of one abstraction level about another. Why HAL= ? Why >> > udev? Why drivers as modules? Why not just go and integrate all stuff = into >> > the kernel, well (again!) like MS do, and don't please say I compare w= rong >> > things just because MS is not OSS. >> >> You make a wrong comparison, because MS is not free (libre) software. >> With Linux, and systemd, and OpenRC, and HAL, and devfs, and sysv, we >> have been able to try new technologies (and see that some of them >> fail, like HAL [yuck!]), because we have the source. > > But the comparison is quite right. When one have to deal with software > lock-in, this means that one have to fork a huge stack of software > which is theoretically doable (because software is free), but is > impractical unless one owns a corporation with large number of full > time paid developers. The same way one in theory can change everything > in MS by changing assembler code of their software. Well, this will > require some time, but asm is nothing more than low-level programming > language, thus formally one have "the sources". You cannot distribute changes that you do to proprietary disassembled code. So again, the comparison makes no sense. > The key feature here is deliberate and malicious lock-in: as long as > software enforces one, it is non-free in practical terms. We are running around in circles; I told you why is not a reasonable comparison, and I failed to convince you. You told me that it's a right comparison to make, and you failed to convince me. We could keep beating a dead horse, but it's better if we agree to disagree on this point. (Which kinda makes the rest of the discussion moot, but whatever). >> As you said, you can replace the whole of Linux if you so desire (and >> have the technical ability). >> >> You will never be able to do that with any MS software, and so the >> comparison makes no sense. > > Hey, but people are already doing this! Google for ReactOS or Wine. I mentioned ReactOS in this thread; from [1]: "If enough people, willing and able, want to do it, they will. Look at ReactOS. Or Syllable. Or Hurd. Or Debian/kFreeBSD." However, the ReactOS people aren't disassembling code; they are coding a different (but compatible) implementation. Same goes with Wine. And even if you say that disassembled code is the same as carefully written code (which is not), we have comments inside the code [2], and DCSV logs [3], and tons of documentation. With proprietary code we don't; sometimes a little documentation for how to *use* the code, but not how to *change* it or *understand* it. >> The thing (and that's also my point), apparently *most* of the people >> willing and able to create cool software have decided that systemd is >> the way to go. And, even if you want to attribute that to a simple >> monetary issue, most of them do it *happily* because many things are >> just easier to do with systemd. > > Most people should never care what init system is in charge while > writing end-user software. If software (e.g. some daemon) depends on > specific init system, it is broken by design. They don't care about the "init" system. They care about the *features* systemd provides; logind, the journal, timedated, hostnamed, etc. Obviously systemd is much more than just an init system. >> > They'll be able to >> > stuff everything into it, making effectively a thing in itself which w= ill >> > dictate you where to go and what to do, just because you're not techni= cally >> > competent enough to deal with it -- hence more support calls and more = $ etc >> > etc. >> >> Oh, but nobody will be able to do that to me. I know how to write >> code. I'm willing (and I believe able) to write and/or modify software >> if I don't like how it does things. I've done it before; I could do it >> again. > > Even if you have superior and outstanding programming skills I doubt > you have time and resources to rewrite the whole software stack (e.g. > systemd and everything depending on it) yourself. As I said, that is moot since Linux+systemd+GNOME are taking Linux to the place I always wanted it to be. >> >> If *someone*, *willing* AND *able* steps up to do ALL that work, MAYB= E >> >> it would happen. >> >> >> >> But don't complain if no one does, and it doesn't. >> > >> > >> > That's your point -- and mine. We aren't complaining -- we want to pre= vent >> > this. >> >> Prevent what? People writing new software that offers cool features, >> and therefore distros are using them? > > Prevent loosing our freedom in practical sense: while the software > will be still free in FSF license terms, it will be so locked onto > itself that it will be eventually impossible for anyone besides large > corporations to replace it. Thus in the end we'll be dictated what to > do and how to do. You will never loose your freedom in the most practical of senses: the code is free. >> > The forward-looking people must unite, it may sound ridiculous, >> > against systemd >> >> You cannot stop people for writing new cool stuff, nor distros for >> wanting to using them. You CAN write your own cool stuff, and >> convincing people that is better than the alternative. > > And you can't force people to use your cool stuff because you're > assuming it is cool. Who is forcing you? If at some point in the future the Gentoo council sets systemd as the default recommended init system for the distribution, OpenRC will still be available. Nobody is forcing no one to anything. > That's called freedom, freedom of choice. That > is what I love Gentoo for. That's why I support systemd > profile propose. Well, "support" is code, not words. This is not a democracy; the users don't "vote" what they want. If that's the option you prefer, help the devs achieve it. > That's why I will do my best to protect this freedom > in our community. Do it with code, not arguing in a mailing list. And I'm not talking about C; ebuilds, overlays, the profiles settings, even documentation; anything that helps the distro go in the direction you want it to go. Again, arguing in the ML has no real impact in the distro. >> > You know what it is: everything's free but nothing to choose from. We = had it >> > before, it's called communism. Maybe it is not that bad but we don't w= ant it >> > anymore. >> >> (Really? A cold war reference?) > > Yes, we have a software^Wcorporation war right upon us. There is no war; we are all on the same side, the FLOSS side. Regards. [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.user/272617 [2] http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd/tree/src/journal/sd-journal= .c#n63 [3] http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd/log/ [4] http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/#manualsanddocumentati= onforusersandadministrators --=20 Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9s Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingenier=C3=ADa de la Computaci=C3=B3n Universidad Nacional Aut=C3=B3noma de M=C3=A9xico