[gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Pandu Poluan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 304 bytes --]

So, I just found out that some Debian Developers decided to fork Debian,
because they can no longer stand this abomination called 'systemd':

https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20141127.212941.f55acc3a.en.html

What do you think, people? Shouldn't we offer them our eudev project to
assist?

Rgds,
--

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 475 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 863 bytes --]

On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 10:11:20 +0000, Pandu Poluan wrote:

> So, I just found out that some Debian Developers decided to fork Debian,
> because they can no longer stand this abomination called 'systemd':
> 
> https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20141127.212941.f55acc3a.en.html
> 
> What do you think, people? Shouldn't we offer them our eudev project to
> assist?

I think it's a great example of the power of open source. At last some
systemd haters are doing something more pro-active than name-calling.

No one needs to offer eudev to them, the code is already out there, but
openrc may be more useful. It has a few of the advantages of systemd.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

- How many surrealists does it take to change a light bulb?
- Two: one to hold the giraffe, the other to fill the bathtub with
  lots of brightly colored machine tools.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[the]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 29/11/14 13:11, Pandu Poluan wrote:
> So, I just found out that some Debian Developers decided to fork 
> Debian, because they can no longer stand this abomination called 
> 'systemd':
> 
> https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20141127.212941.f55acc3a.en.html
>
> 
Thanks for spreading the news.
I hope this project will develop and prosper!

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJUebjiAAoJEK64IL1uI2habj0H/0R2u9UImnDod/19S/+YJTul
DS1pmb1MSq5Dr1uaaegxPnaEJB/o7KmkNh9U9RmyY+4H/61rosBS6Dp6H38wCZNY
MrQW5XO0nnnbsQuSFoODQKISJjJ1W23zkLsK68LhZNx7LgukDuybj5Fcxd9bjvSj
aOy9P1JYv8+kSIJ6qs8iLjL4q1Np8fsSTbQ6rHRn2T6zOe0uq+wNJxLRuRPL+M46
C8ToRogNOD7YDeiYMr2BX3tVUmaFUVjU+zr6S9DWO2ZtHoza/YyzoYlAiFd0KPpg
NfIpGJQtnW2Q+Rx+3oTzTqRMVxcRA3q1NQI1iVI9sx243KSLQDUdt0gRvj+BNbE=
=wj3z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Marc Stürmer]

Am 29.11.2014 um 11:11 schrieb Pandu Poluan:

> What do you think, people? Shouldn't we offer them our eudev project to
> assist?

Since Eudev has always been opensource under the GPLv2, like udev too, 
there's no need to /offer/ it.

If they choose to use it, they can use it, no offer/questions necessary. 
Simple.

Re: [gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Andrew Savchenko]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 690 bytes --]

On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 17:32:08 +0100 Marc Stürmer wrote:
> Am 29.11.2014 um 11:11 schrieb Pandu Poluan:
> 
> > What do you think, people? Shouldn't we offer them our eudev project to
> > assist?
> 
> Since Eudev has always been opensource under the GPLv2, like udev too, 
> there's no need to /offer/ it.
> 
> If they choose to use it, they can use it, no offer/questions necessary. 
> Simple.

As far as I understand, Pandu meant "we can recommend them to use",
but not some offer in commercial or proprietary terms.

Don't forget that most people on the list are not native speakers,
so IMHO superfluous verbalism is inappropriate here.

Best regards,
Andrew Savchenko

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

[gentoo-user] Re: Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[»Q«]

On Sun, 30 Nov 2014 07:43:21 +0300
Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 17:32:08 +0100 Marc Stürmer wrote:
> > Am 29.11.2014 um 11:11 schrieb Pandu Poluan:
> >   
> > > What do you think, people? Shouldn't we offer them our eudev
> > > project to assist?  
> > 
> > Since Eudev has always been opensource under the GPLv2, like udev
> > too, there's no need to /offer/ it.
> > 
> > If they choose to use it, they can use it, no offer/questions
> > necessary. Simple.  
> 
> As far as I understand, Pandu meant "we can recommend them to use",
> but not some offer in commercial or proprietary terms.

They've added something called "devuan-eudev" to their github workspace
today, <https://github.com/devuan/devuan-eudev>.  It would be nice if
there could be one eudev project with the aim of supporting Gentoo,
Devuan, and whatever other distros want to use it.  Or if there must be
multiple eudevs, it would be nice if the different teams could
communicate and maybe take some patches from each other.  (I'm no dev,
so take my opinions on "what would be nice" for development with a
chunk of salt.)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Pandu Poluan]

On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 9:54 AM, »Q« <boxcars@gmx.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Nov 2014 07:43:21 +0300
> Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 17:32:08 +0100 Marc Stürmer wrote:
>> > Am 29.11.2014 um 11:11 schrieb Pandu Poluan:
>> >
>> > > What do you think, people? Shouldn't we offer them our eudev
>> > > project to assist?
>> >
>> > Since Eudev has always been opensource under the GPLv2, like udev
>> > too, there's no need to /offer/ it.
>> >
>> > If they choose to use it, they can use it, no offer/questions
>> > necessary. Simple.
>>
>> As far as I understand, Pandu meant "we can recommend them to use",
>> but not some offer in commercial or proprietary terms.

Yup, that's what I meant.

Sorry for the confusion; I'm not a native English speaker, so I may
have used an improper verb there :-)

> They've added something called "devuan-eudev" to their github workspace
> today, <https://github.com/devuan/devuan-eudev>.  It would be nice if
> there could be one eudev project with the aim of supporting Gentoo,
> Devuan, and whatever other distros want to use it.  Or if there must be
> multiple eudevs, it would be nice if the different teams could
> communicate and maybe take some patches from each other.  (I'm no dev,
> so take my opinions on "what would be nice" for development with a
> chunk of salt.)
>

Actually, that's my point by saying "offer": Rather than letting them
build eudev from scratch, let's work together on the eudev we have,
promote it to something distro-neutral, then let Gentoo and Devuan
(and whatever other distros) derive from that 'upstream'

Uh, I do make myself clear(er) here, don't I?


Rgds,
--
FdS Pandu E Poluan
~ IT Optimizer ~

 • LOPSA Member #15248
 • Blog : http://pandu.poluan.info/blog/
 • Linked-In : http://id.linkedin.com/in/pepoluan

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Marc Stürmer]

Am 01.12.2014 um 09:22 schrieb Pandu Poluan:

> Actually, that's my point by saying "offer": Rather than letting them
> build eudev from scratch, let's work together on the eudev we have,
> promote it to something distro-neutral, then let Gentoo and Devuan
> (and whatever other distros) derive from that 'upstream'

Eudev is an already established opensource project with a working 
infrastructure and development team.

It's got a leader, it's got an IRC channel, an open git repository for 
development and even a home page.

So if they want to work with the already established team, I am sure 
they are welcome to add their man power to it.

The building blocks are all there in place, they just need to come over 
and start working together.

Also I do think that veteran unix admins do know how OSS development 
does work and how not; so if they fork Eudev instead of working together 
I presume they have their reasons for it.

Re: [gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Marc Stuermer]

Am 29.11.2014 um 11:11 schrieb Pandu Poluan:

> What do you think, people? Shouldn't we offer them our eudev project to
> assist?

After studying their home pages so far I came to the conclusion, that I
cannot take "Devuan" serious. It still feels more like a prank to me
than a serious thing.

First the name "Veteran Unix Admins collective" sounds strange. Nobody
ever heared of them before, they don't have any kind of information on
the web before that announcement of the fork showed up.

Second: they are already asking for donations.

Third, but most important reason: no names on their f***ing pages. Why?
If I would fork a project I would mention popular names right from the
beginning to gain a serious momentum! This has not happened here at all.

Who are those people? Whose behind this so called "fork"? That's a thing
that's still lurking somewhere in the shadows.

Especially the fact, that they don't mention any names at all on their
project pages is something that's really strange to say at last.

So unless those people behind the shadows are coming out of the dark and
going to solidify it's just something many people would like to happen,
of course - but without any substance at all.

That's why I am skeptical about all of this created buzz around it and
seriously doubt if they are going to be able to deliver.

Re: [gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Rich Freeman]

On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Marc Stuermer <mail@marc-stuermer.de> wrote:
> That's why I am skeptical about all of this created buzz around it and
> seriously doubt if they are going to be able to deliver.
>

Systemd = buzz these days.  There was a slashdot post about some
kernel bug and it seemed like 1/3rd of the posts were talking about
whether systemd is to blame.  You can't go three days without some
kind of flamewar, and I'm sure the slashdot marketing team is milking
it for every ad dollar they can get before they go bankrupt...  :)

--
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Bill Kenworthy]

On 30/11/14 07:30, Marc Stuermer wrote:
> Am 29.11.2014 um 11:11 schrieb Pandu Poluan:
> 
>> What do you think, people? Shouldn't we offer them our eudev project to
>> assist?
> 
> After studying their home pages so far I came to the conclusion, that I
> cannot take "Devuan" serious. It still feels more like a prank to me
> than a serious thing.
> 
> First the name "Veteran Unix Admins collective" sounds strange. Nobody
> ever heared of them before, they don't have any kind of information on
> the web before that announcement of the fork showed up.
> 
> Second: they are already asking for donations.
> 
> Third, but most important reason: no names on their f***ing pages. Why?
> If I would fork a project I would mention popular names right from the
> beginning to gain a serious momentum! This has not happened here at all.
> 
> Who are those people? Whose behind this so called "fork"? That's a thing
> that's still lurking somewhere in the shadows.
> 
> Especially the fact, that they don't mention any names at all on their
> project pages is something that's really strange to say at last.
> 
> So unless those people behind the shadows are coming out of the dark and
> going to solidify it's just something many people would like to happen,
> of course - but without any substance at all.
> 
> That's why I am skeptical about all of this created buzz around it and
> seriously doubt if they are going to be able to deliver.
> 

maybe, maybe not.

I read "Veteran Unix Admins collective" as a category that old style
admin types fall into - the background being that systemd is essentially
the old guard, do things based on experience and good practice vs the
new guard whose use case is throw away vm's that are not expected to
hang around, we don't care" amateurs.  I am a native English speaker,
maybe that's why you missed it?

They do make the point that they didn't really have a long term plan to
fork ... they tried to work within the system but have just now decided
that its not going to work so "fork".  I think its a case of watch this
space as they are just getting organised and have a lot to attend to at
very short notice.

Implications? - will gentoo fork if push comes to shove? - using this
example I hope so ... I am already really annoyed that by default
systemd and apps designed to work with it leave traces on openrc based
systems.

BillK

Re: [gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Rich Freeman]

On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Bill Kenworthy <billk@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> I am already really annoyed that by default
> systemd and apps designed to work with it leave traces on openrc based
> systems.

You're getting worked up about text files and filenames.  I suppose
you'll be really upset that bash completion files are now being
installed by default, and packages install logrotate configs and cron
scripts even if you don't use logrotate or cron.

Sure, we could add a million more layers of conditionals to everything
and you might save a few dozen inodes on your 10GB install, at the
cost of lots of hassle/bugs/etc.  In general Gentoo tends to take the
pragmatic approach.  If you're a purist of just about any kind you're
going to have to hold your nose.  However, this cuts both ways - the
purists who don't want YOU to be able to make the choices YOU want to
make also have to hold their noses.  :)

--
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Andrew Savchenko]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1249 bytes --]

On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 22:32:18 -0500 Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Bill Kenworthy <billk@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> > I am already really annoyed that by default
> > systemd and apps designed to work with it leave traces on openrc based
> > systems.
> 
> You're getting worked up about text files and filenames.  I suppose
> you'll be really upset that bash completion files are now being
> installed by default, and packages install logrotate configs and cron
> scripts even if you don't use logrotate or cron.

We have INSTALL_MASK for such cases. While it should be used with
care (as improper use will broke system), INSTALL_MASK="*/systemd/*"
keeps my systems clean from this filthy abomination.

> Sure, we could add a million more layers of conditionals to everything
> and you might save a few dozen inodes on your 10GB install, at the
> cost of lots of hassle/bugs/etc.  In general Gentoo tends to take the
> pragmatic approach.  If you're a purist of just about any kind you're
> going to have to hold your nose.  However, this cuts both ways - the
> purists who don't want YOU to be able to make the choices YOU want to
> make also have to hold their noses.  :)

Best regards,
Andrew Savchenko

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Bill Kenworthy]

On 30/11/14 12:35, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 22:32:18 -0500 Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Bill Kenworthy <billk@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>> I am already really annoyed that by default
>>> systemd and apps designed to work with it leave traces on openrc based
>>> systems.
>>
>> You're getting worked up about text files and filenames.  I suppose
>> you'll be really upset that bash completion files are now being
>> installed by default, and packages install logrotate configs and cron
>> scripts even if you don't use logrotate or cron.
> 
> We have INSTALL_MASK for such cases. While it should be used with
> care (as improper use will broke system), INSTALL_MASK="*/systemd/*"
> keeps my systems clean from this filthy abomination.
> 
>> Sure, we could add a million more layers of conditionals to everything
>> and you might save a few dozen inodes on your 10GB install, at the
>> cost of lots of hassle/bugs/etc.  In general Gentoo tends to take the
>> pragmatic approach.  If you're a purist of just about any kind you're
>> going to have to hold your nose.  However, this cuts both ways - the
>> purists who don't want YOU to be able to make the choices YOU want to
>> make also have to hold their noses.  :)
> 
> Best regards,
> Andrew Savchenko
> 

Yes I am using install masking ... but I believe there was a comment
that this could break things as some programs expected to see the files
in the systemd directories.  Hence my comment.

And about being a purist and holding my nose ... no I am not ... but I
do not like useless cruft just because it was the easy way out which was
my impression of the conversation on the email list - hence INSTASL_MASLK.

BillK

Re: [gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Marc Stürmer]

Am , schrieb Bill Kenworthy:

> I read "Veteran Unix Admins collective" as a category that old style
> admin types fall into - the background being that systemd is 
> essentially
> the old guard, do things based on experience and good practice vs the
> new guard whose use case is throw away vm's that are not expected to
> hang around, we don't care" amateurs.  I am a native English speaker,
> maybe that's why you missed it?

Yes, it is a category and no, I didn't miss that point.

The point though is that the way this fork was being announced is quite 
simple the worst way to do it. The announcement was not signed by any 
name and just made by someone named "Majordomo Debianfork." Not that's 
why I do call a bad way to start such a project and building trust.

Then they are already asking for donations. Yes, of course such a 
project has the need for donations, true.

But would you spend someone money where you've got no clue whom you are 
giving it? I won't.

So until they are going to publish a list of names about who's behind 
this project I for myself am just going to think about it as a more or 
less nice reminder to the Debian community about that a nother fork with 
the implicit goal to eliminate Systemd would quite quickly gain much 
momentum and speed. The goal of such a prank? To make the people think 
about it and change their opinion that this would not happen.

Well, we are for sure going to see sooner or later, what's the real deal 
about Devuan.

Re: [gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Philip Webb]

141130 Marc Stürmer wrote:
> The point though is that the way this fork was being announced is quite 
> simple the worst way to do it. The announcement was not signed by any 
> name and just made by someone named "Majordomo Debianfork." Not that's 
> why I do call a bad way to start such a project and building trust.
> 
> Then they are already asking for donations. Yes, of course such a 
> project has the need for donations, true.  But would you send someone money
> where you've got no clue whom you are giving it? I won't.
> 
> So until they are going to publish a list of names about who's behind 
> this project I for myself am just going to think about it as a more or 
> less nice reminder to the Debian community about that a nother fork with 
> the implicit goal to eliminate Systemd would quite quickly gain much 
> momentum and speed. The goal of such a prank? To make the people think 
> about it and change their opinion that this would not happen.

A rather shrewd analysis ; the name 'Devuan' adds to my suspicions.

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,   Philip Webb
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|   Cities Centre, University of Toronto
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'   purslowatchassdotutorontodotca

Re: [gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Marc Stürmer]

Am 30.11.2014 um 12:44 schrieb Philip Webb:

> A rather shrewd analysis ; the name 'Devuan' adds to my suspicions.

Well, the people behind it claim to be mostly from Italy and this should 
be pronounced like "DevOne."

People so far who have published their names do include:

- Franco Lanza (who fixed a misconfiguration at the nginx setup of 
devuan.org he claimed) and
- Teodoro Santoni, who claimed to be a junior-jack-of-all-trades in the 
original VUA group, going to be a maintainer of whatever is going to be 
needed.

Source: 
https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/thread/20141127.212941.f55acc3a.en.html#20141127.212941.f55acc3a

This still leaves quite in the dark who's the initiator behind it, which 
kind of leadership there's at the moment - or is there none?

And, of course, the possible other people being involved so far.

Re: [gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1194 bytes --]

On Sunday 30 Nov 2014 12:29:07 Marc Stürmer wrote:
> Am 30.11.2014 um 12:44 schrieb Philip Webb:
> > A rather shrewd analysis ; the name 'Devuan' adds to my suspicions.
> 
> Well, the people behind it claim to be mostly from Italy and this should
> be pronounced like "DevOne."
> 
> People so far who have published their names do include:
> 
> - Franco Lanza (who fixed a misconfiguration at the nginx setup of
> devuan.org he claimed) and
> - Teodoro Santoni, who claimed to be a junior-jack-of-all-trades in the
> original VUA group, going to be a maintainer of whatever is going to be
> needed.
> 
> Source:
> https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/thread/20141127.212941.f55acc3a.en.html#20141
> 127.212941.f55acc3a
> 
> This still leaves quite in the dark who's the initiator behind it, which
> kind of leadership there's at the moment - or is there none?
> 
> And, of course, the possible other people being involved so far.


The request for funding when not much code has been written yet makes me 
suspicious.  Nevertheless, I support moving away from a RHL sponsored 
monolithic binary and hopefully if not today it will happen eventually.

-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 649 bytes --]

On Sun, 30 Nov 2014 13:01:33 +0000, Mick wrote:

> Nevertheless, I support moving away from a RHL sponsored 
> monolithic binary and hopefully if not today it will happen eventually.

systemd isn't monolithic so I can only assume you are referring to the
Linux kernel here :)

Red Hat open source everything, so while they can pay for the development
of the code, they can never own it. Yes, their money gives them control
of what is and is not developed by those they are paying, but it gives
them neither exclusive rights to code nor the right to exclude code.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Never sleep with anyone crazier than yourself.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1035 bytes --]

On Sunday 30 Nov 2014 13:13:02 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Nov 2014 13:01:33 +0000, Mick wrote:
> > Nevertheless, I support moving away from a RHL sponsored
> > monolithic binary and hopefully if not today it will happen eventually.
> 
> systemd isn't monolithic so I can only assume you are referring to the
> Linux kernel here :)

I was actually referring to the systemd takeover.  I know currently the 
incursion is in userspace, but soon enough I would expect them to try it on 
the kernel too.  ;-)

> Red Hat open source everything, so while they can pay for the development
> of the code, they can never own it. Yes, their money gives them control
> of what is and is not developed by those they are paying, but it gives
> them neither exclusive rights to code nor the right to exclude code.

Sure, but by applying Microsoft's monopolistic lessons they can have us all in 
a stranglehold before you know it:

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish

 :-p

-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 894 bytes --]

On Sun, 30 Nov 2014 16:33:23 +0000, Mick wrote:

> > Red Hat open source everything, so while they can pay for the
> > development of the code, they can never own it. Yes, their money
> > gives them control of what is and is not developed by those they are
> > paying, but it gives them neither exclusive rights to code nor the
> > right to exclude code.  
> 
> Sure, but by applying Microsoft's monopolistic lessons they can have us
> all in a stranglehold before you know it:
> 
>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish

The very title of this thread shows that that need not happen...

Red Hat can only control what goes in Red Hat, not Linux at large. That's
why, even though they are the largest contributor to the kernel, their
distro's kernel is heavily patched.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

I've got a mind like a... a... what's that thing called?

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Daniel Frey]

On 11/30/2014 05:13 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> systemd isn't monolithic so I can only assume you are referring to the
> Linux kernel here :)

systemd most certainly is monolithic as well as modular. You can't run
journald without systemd and you most certainly can't replace journald
with a third party binary.

Dan

Re: [gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Marc Stürmer]

Am 30.11.2014 um 17:39 schrieb Daniel Frey:

 > systemd most certainly is monolithic as well as modular. You can't run
> journald without systemd and you most certainly can't replace journald
> with a third party binary.

IMHO this type of discussion leads to nowhere. Of course you can view it 
like that or the other way around and both sides will be always right, 
and if saying it's monolithic, well, so is X11 which is also not quite 
unixy to speak of. But it is accepted.

Even if you view systemd as modular as possible, it will not solve the 
other problems for you, if you've got them with that kind of software, 
and for most people that's Lennart Poettering, his track record of 
software, his ego and GNOME attitude ("my way or the high way"). YMMV.

Re: [gentoo-user] Debian forked, because of systemd brouhaha

[Joerg Schilling]

Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:

> On Sun, 30 Nov 2014 13:01:33 +0000, Mick wrote:
>
> > Nevertheless, I support moving away from a RHL sponsored 
> > monolithic binary and hopefully if not today it will happen eventually.
>
> systemd isn't monolithic so I can only assume you are referring to the
> Linux kernel here :)

From the discussions I had on the IRC #debianfork channel, it seems that it is 
structured but it forms a quasi monolitic phalanx.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.net                    (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       joerg.schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/'