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. |