Re: [gentoo-user] The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now

[Sid S]

Regardless, it would probably be useful to contact the people from the
Debian project who were interested in forking it. It's likely Gentoo would
end up using a fair amount of their work at some point.

On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 6:18 AM, Sid S <r030t1@×××××.com> wrote:

> The reason this question is so hard to answer is because it is not a
> technical question, it is a moral and ethical one. The links presented
> start to approach the issue being discussed in this light but do not
> entirely accept the right question. I suspect this is because it seems
> rather absurd.
>
> We shall analyze some popular responses in this light.
>
> Systemd is easy to work around!
> http://www.vitavonni.de/blog/201410/2014102101-avoiding-systemd.html
> except,
> https://lobste.rs/s/y5skqt/avoiding_systemd_isn_t_hard/comments/eayjn3#c_eayjn3
> but http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html gives some
> decent counterpoints,
> which http://lwn.net/Articles/619992/ either supports or is ambivalent
> about.
>
> They all basically boil down to "someone is doing the work, and if it is a
> better way to do it it will be okay." Except this isn't true. The proof by
> contradiction is exceptionally simple:
>
> If this was a just world, Lennart's pants would be on fire.
> Lennart's pants are not on fire.
> Therefore, this is not a just world, and justice must be manufactured.
>
> You might ask why his pants (and the pants of most systemd supporters)
> would be on fire. Well,
> https://pappp.net/?p=969 clearly explains how FLOS is not UNIX, and
> the easy counterpoints get thoroughly trashed
> http://lwn.net/Articles/440843/, and
> http://blog.lusis.org/blog/2014/11/20/systemd-redux/ here's a guy
> agreeing and suggesting everyone hit the big red EJECT.
>
> Why UNIX? Well, because that's just a concise, easy-to-phrase proxy for
> the deeper issue of
>
> https://pay.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/2k5b7e/the_concern_isnt_that_systemd_itself_isnt/
> (aside: read the C++ in the kernel tangent if you are not familiar, it
> seems to mirror this argument taking place and notably, Linus has chosen a
> side on that one!)
> which is echoed here http://lwn.net/Articles/440843/
> and here http://lwn.net/Articles/576078/
> and here http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/ (start with
> unix philosophy)
> and here http://lwn.net/Articles/494605/.
>
> Once upon a time I met a very masterful troll who got me to say precisely
> what I needed to say precisely when I did not want to say it. What he got
> me to say was:
> >Oct 27 06:05:30 <*******>    I study the orthodoxy consistently[sic]
> >Oct 27 06:05:38 <R0b0t1`>    To find its flaws, yes
>
> So did Lennart &co. study the orthodox to learn from its failures? Did
> they construct a conservative (re)implementation of the software exhibiting
> those failures? It has been shown and continues to be shown that: no, they
> are flying by the seat of their pants. A solution could have been
> constructed which requires far less labor. Not only far less of *their*
> labor, but far less labor for *everyone else* using a *nix. But they did
> not thoroughly investigate such avenues, even within their
> reimplementation! They are recreating bugs! It is impossible for them to
> claim they are doing it over to do it right, as they have already failed at
> that purpose.
>
> They have been shown to have wasted effort and continue to do so. When
> labor is scarce, that is the most unethical action one can undertake.
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Marc Joliet <marcec@×××.de> wrote:
>
>> Am Fri, 21 Nov 2014 01:32:16 -0600
>> schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés <caneko@×××××.com>:
>>
>> [...]
>> > I highly recommend the article John Corbet wrote for LWN a week ago:
>> >
>> > http://lwn.net/Articles/619992/
>> [...]
>>
>> Thanks for the link, it was a good read.
>>
>> FWIW, I found this linked in one of the comments:
>>
>>     http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/
>>
>> Both articles echo thoughts that I have more and more with every
>> "discussion"
>> regarding systemd.
>>
>> My takeaway is similar to that of the lwn.net article (that is, both
>> sides are
>> being unnecessarily thick-headed), and find it remarkable how much I
>> recognise
>> from "discussions" here on gentoo-user (in contrast, gentoo-amd64 has
>> been much
>> more level-headed).  However, I disagree with with the categorisation at
>> the
>> end, mainly because I hate it when people have to sort each other into
>> "camps",
>> so that they know who to hate and who to like (which isn't the author's
>> fault,
>> I think, politicised discussions tend to go that way as they intensify),
>> but
>> also because I think it is too strict and doesn't account for overlap (for
>> myself I see reasons for both being and not being in either group).
>>
>> Greetings
>> --
>> Marc Joliet
>> --
>> "People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know
>> we
>> don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup
>>
>
>