Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Daniel Campbell <lists@××××××××.us>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2014 20:30:29
Message-Id: 52FFCE52.5060401@sporkbox.us
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie by "Canek Peláez Valdés"
1 On 02/15/2014 11:32 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
2 > On Feb 15, 2014 11:02 AM, "Tanstaafl" <tanstaafl@×××××××××××.org
3 > <mailto:tanstaafl@×××××××××××.org>> wrote:
4 >>
5 >> On 2014-02-15 10:16 AM, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@×××××××××××.org
6 > <mailto:tanstaafl@×××××××××××.org>> wrote:
7 >>>
8 >>> Hi all,
9 >>>
10 >>> Not to revive a flame-fest against systemd, but...
11 >>>
12 >>> I'm sure some or most of you have already heard about this, but I found
13 >>> a really decent thread discussing this whole systemd thing. It is only
14 >>> really comparing systemd and upstart, as that was the debate going on in
15 >>> the debian TC, but it is a great read, and has actually made me rethink
16 >>> my blind objections to systemd a bit.
17 >>
18 >>
19 >> One of which was logging:
20 >>
21 >> "20. Myth: systemd makes it impossible to run syslog.
22 >>
23 >> Not true, we carefully made sure when we introduced the journal that
24 > all data is also passed on to any syslog daemon running. In fact, if
25 > something changed, then only that syslog gets more complete data now
26 > than it got before, since we now cover early boot stuff as well as
27 > STDOUT/STDERR of any system service."
28 >>
29 >> From: http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html
30 >
31 > Also, for those of you who don't follow Linux-related news, Ubuntu will
32 > also change to systemd in the future:
33 >
34 > http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1316
35 >
36 > And I *heard* that Slackware was also discussing the possibility, but
37 > since I don't follow Slackware at all, I don't know for sure.
38 >
39 > Anyway, distros not using systemd, and that they are not really small
40 > and/or niche, seem to be disappearing. The discussion that Tanstaafl
41 > posted is interesting since the arguments used by the four TC members
42 > are really focused on the technical merits of the proposed init systems.
43 >
44 > Regards.
45 > --
46 > Canek Peláez Valdés
47 > Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación
48 > Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
49 >
50
51 The lack of foresight on social and political ramifications is epidemic
52 to most of the FOSS world, as evidenced by the creeping adoption of
53 systemd. Things are already depending on things that systemd provides,
54 and is dividing the ecosystem into "systemd" vs "everything else".
55 Ambitious projects like systemd are damaging to the rich variety that
56 should be found in the FOSS ecosystem. systemd in particular encourages
57 embracing vertical integration and rejection of POSIX and UNIX
58 principles. Its culture is adversarial to anyone who doubts the Great
59 Image that Lennart and his employer has. If it were a project that was
60 humble, without an agenda, and did not undergo evangelism, I'd have no
61 problems with it because choice is something that I value immensely. But
62 because it *isn't* humble, *has* an agenda, only reached the adoption it
63 currently has by *lots* of arguing and pushing, and refuses to coexist
64 with other init systems, I cannot respect it as a legitimate,
65 non-aggressive, non-intrusive software project. I consider it a toxic
66 threat to FOSS and refuse to have it on any system I maintain.
67
68 systemd has technical merits (cgroups, socket activation, parellel
69 execution of daemons, etc), but they fall by the wayside and become
70 irrelevant to me when it swallows the functionality of multiple projects
71 that should be separate (see: udev) and tries to be everything to
72 everyone (splash image, web server, boot time graphs, etc). The social
73 tactics at work from the systemd team (and verily, other Red Hat
74 projects like GNOME) are reminiscent of Microsoft through the use of the
75 "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" methodology. With their paid developers
76 and more abundant resources, Red Hat (and arguably other corporations)
77 can use their developers to push their agendas and, in a sense,
78 commandeer control of the FOSS world. I will give them no inch on my
79 systems. I am skeptical of their involvement in the kernel, as well.
80
81 It's sad to see Debian giving into peer pressure. I honestly thought
82 that they would see the agenda miles away and prevent a monoculture. For
83 people who are technically intelligent, they're seriously lacking any
84 foresight in their decisions and are completely blind to the social and
85 political ramifications. Distros will regret depending on such a project
86 and it will set GNU/Linux development back many years when systemd
87 becomes a full stack and working without it is made difficult or
88 impractical (through the use of lock-in tactics). I hope that Gentoo
89 continues to be a safe haven for choice and the spirit of FOSS. Without
90 it, I may have to concede and either start building my own distro, or
91 going to the BSDs.
92
93 Just my two cents. Ignore or reply at your discretion.

Replies