1 |
On 20/10/13 09:34, Daniel Campbell wrote: |
2 |
> On 10/19/2013 06:35 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: |
3 |
>> Am 19.10.2013 17:02, schrieb Daniel Campbell: |
4 |
>>> On 10/17/2013 11:27 PM, Mark David Dumlao wrote: |
5 |
>>>> https://www.linux.com/news/featured-blogs/200-libby-clark/733595-all-about-the-linux-kernel-cgroups-redesign |
6 |
>>>> |
7 |
>>>> Not sure if I read that just right... but since nobody is doing cgroup |
8 |
>>>> management besides systemd, in practice the cgroups implementation in |
9 |
>>>> Linux wasn't very consistent. So since systemd is doing it, their work |
10 |
>>>> is helping shape the kernel's cgroups api? |
11 |
>>>> |
12 |
>>>> Interesting... |
13 |
>>>> |
14 |
>>> >From my perspective it looks like systemd developers are trying to push |
15 |
>>> their ideas into the kernel, almost like they intend to merge systemd |
16 |
>>> *with* the kernel. |
17 |
>> from what I read in the article cgroups are a mess and are cleaned up |
18 |
>> anyway. The only real user of cgroups at the moment is systemd. |
19 |
>> Others are welcome to make use of cgroups too. But in the current state |
20 |
>> nobody blames them for not jumping in. |
21 |
> No complaints here in improving something, but consider the source is |
22 |
> all I'm saying. |
23 |
> |
24 |
>>> If systemd is the only implementation of cgroups and |
25 |
>>> their developers are working on cgroup support in the kernel, it spells |
26 |
>>> calamity given their history of evangelism and zealotry. |
27 |
>> well, going over some old ml threads on fedora mailing lists all I could |
28 |
>> find was that Poettering and Sievers DID listen and DID make changes if |
29 |
>> the demand was high enough. |
30 |
>> |
31 |
>> Sure, I dislike systemd. Sure what happened with udev was a dick move. |
32 |
>> But their 'zealotry' is a lot less developed than the zealotry of those |
33 |
>> who exploded about using an 'init-thingy' in the future. |
34 |
>> |
35 |
> I'd say their zealotry is less loud and more persistent. Their way is |
36 |
> best, UNIX (and its philosophy) is outmoded, people are thinking 30 |
37 |
> years behind where we are, etc etc etc. Those who have separate /usr and |
38 |
> blame systemd for pushing them to use an initramfs aren't seeing the |
39 |
> real problem (upstreams not putting things where they belong, FHS no |
40 |
> longer *really* being worked on, generally just the filesystem being |
41 |
> played with like a toy) |
42 |
> |
43 |
>>> I truly wish I understood why a single userland program and its |
44 |
>>> developers are being given the keys to an entire subsystem of the |
45 |
>>> kernel. |
46 |
>> they aren't. |
47 |
> Of the people who have committed to the cgroup subsystem of the kernel, |
48 |
> how many are not members of the systemd, GNOME, or Red Hat projects? |
49 |
> I'll let that speak for itself. |
50 |
> |
51 |
>>> Their changes to udev have proven to be a headache for users, |
52 |
>> yes? which ones? |
53 |
> Persistent NIC naming, for starters. The former maintainer's idea to |
54 |
> merge with systemd (which was influenced by Mr. Poettering in the first |
55 |
> place) when the two are completely separate pieces of software that do |
56 |
> two completely different jobs, and various other troubles with udev > |
57 |
> 175 that one can Google for and find tons of results. |
58 |
|
59 |
I can't find anything that would be true. Can you point out some? |
60 |
A lot of FUD[1] and outright lies coming from people, who, for example, |
61 |
don't like systemd. |
62 |
|
63 |
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt |
64 |
|
65 |
I know for a fact udev-208 is a full replacement for udev-171 in terms |
66 |
that both work on same kernels, same libcs, and so forth. That's why |
67 |
171 is no longer in Portage, because it's completely useless from users |
68 |
(and developers) point of view. |
69 |
|
70 |
Adjusting some configs and enabling some kernel options that have been |
71 |
around for a long time is just part of normal maintenance process, |
72 |
that's what we have admins for. |