Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×
Open Source Programming Linux

Removing Libsystemd0 From a Live-running Debian System 755

lkcl writes The introduction of systemd has unilaterally created a polarization of the GNU/Linux community that is remarkably similar to the monopolistic power position wielded by Microsoft in the late 1990s. Choices were stark: use Windows (with SMB/CIFS Services), or use UNIX (with NFS and NIS). Only the introduction of fully-compatible reverse-engineered NT Domains services corrected the situation. Instructions on how to remove systemd include dire warnings that "all dependent packages will be removed", rendering a normal Debian Desktop system flat-out impossible to achieve. It was therefore necessary to demonstrate that it is actually possible to run a Debian Desktop GUI system (albeit an unusual one: fvwm) with libsystemd0 removed. The reason for doing so: it doesn't matter how good systemd is believed to be or in fact actually is: the reason for removing it is, apart from the alarm at how extensive systemd is becoming (including interfering with firewall rules), it's the way that it's been introduced in a blatantly cavalier fashion as a polarized all-or-nothing option, forcing people to consider abandoning the GNU/Linux of their choice and to seriously consider using FreeBSD or any other distro that properly respects the Software Freedom principle of the right to choose what software to run. We aren't all "good at coding", or paid to work on Software Libre: that means that those people who are need to be much more responsible, and to start — finally — to listen to what people are saying. Developing a thick skin is a good way to abdicate responsibility and, as a result, place people into untenable positions.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Removing Libsystemd0 From a Live-running Debian System

Comments Filter:
  • by steak ( 145650 ) on Sunday February 15, 2015 @05:17PM (#49061681) Homepage Journal

    slackware users are saying "what's all this then?"

    • Re:meanwhile... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 15, 2015 @05:42PM (#49061823)

      slackware users are saying "what's all this then?"

      So are Gentoo users who chose OpenRC. Even if systemd was the best init system ever, and that's quite debatable, I still don't like the way it's being rammed down our throats. I for one reject Poettering.

      I didn't like (and never used) Pulseaudio either. If I wanted to play sound over a network I'd share my media directory. Then I enjoy the ability to also share all of my media (videos, ebooks, etc) in a completely transparent application-agnostic manner. What I wouldn't do is run an unnecessary audio layer requiring application support - and that can do nothing else - in the form of a sound daemon I never wanted and didn't ask for. Software mixing you say? It's called dmix.

      I moved away from Windows and towards open source years ago in order to have choice. I will have that choice whether or not most major distributions gargle the Poettering cock. If Gentoo ever caves in (unlikely but possible), I plan to move to OpenBSD to replace my Gentoo Hardened server and maybe FreeBSD to replace my workstation. The Unix Philosophy has withstood the test of time and I believe in it. I'm sure the kool-aid is quite tasty, but no thanks, I'll pass.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        So are Gentoo users who chose OpenRC.

        Assuming it ever finished compiling...

      • by DrYak ( 748999 ) on Sunday February 15, 2015 @06:55PM (#49062327) Homepage

        I didn't like (and never used) Pulseaudio either. If I wanted to play sound over a network I'd share my media directory.

        Networked sound playing is just an incident of pulseaudio being a sound router. It's a nice feature, but that's not what pulseaudio was basically written for.

        There are lots of situations where sound is routed to something which isn't the usual ALSA driver:
        - lots of headphones/microphones now are USB. They are not another channel on the same soundcard, they are a completely different sound driver. Switching when pluging a headset is not something which is trivially done in ALSA without special support of software.
        - bluetooth, which is VERY common on portable devices (but also might be usefull on dekstops) isn't even a kernel driver. Sound is handled by a deamon communicating with the bluetooth stack. It has much more in common with networked sound than with ALSA.
        - recording the output of another program becomes much more trivial if there's a sound router handling the redirection, instead of needing some special support in software.

        What I wouldn't do is run an unnecessary audio layer requiring application support - and that can do nothing else - in the form of a sound daemon I never wanted and didn't ask for.

        Pulseaudio doesn't require any special support. It can present an ALSA target to any ALSA-enabled software. Most current software don't even have a pulseaudio plugin, they just open the default ALSA device which happens to be one pulseaudio listends to and that just works.

        Software mixing you say? It's called dmix.

        Why the fuck do you want to round a *sound mixer* inside your *kernel space* ?! Do you run your video decoder and webbrowser there too ?
        I prefer to run unnecessary things like sound as daemons in userspace. Thank you very much.

        I moved away from Windows and towards open source years ago in order to have choice.

        And you're still free to disable pulseaudio and use dmix instead, if you want.
        Now indeed, for an init system, it's a bit more complicated to leave complete choice to the end user. Some specialist distro like Gentoo are able to offer you to switch between their default OpenRC and whatever you want.
        But the amount of work and risk of bugs in untested paths is rather high. So don't expect other distros to offer instant switch between systemd and upstart.

        I will have that choice whether or not most major distributions gargle the Poettering cock.

        Instead of being vulgar, maybe you should ask yourself why so many distributions are switching to systemd.
        Maybe, part of the reason would be that systemd solves actual real world problems that these distributions need fixed.
        Maybe that's because systemd people and Lennart Poettering actually ship code, instead of just sitting the whole day bitching and cursing on internet forums.
        Maybe if you didn't spent all your energy on whinning about systemd, and actually tried to *DO* something, to *FIX* the problems, and write an actual good solution, maybe your solution would be the one picked up by distros.

        Also please try to avoid making confusion between the actual piece of code that runs as PID 1 (which is indeed confusingly called "systemd") and all the other pieces of code that add the functionnality mentionned in all systemd articles (these pieces of code are all members of a project which is also called by the same name "systemd", but all pieces of code are completely different deamons like "networkd", "journald", etc.). In other words, it's not the PID 1 that get stuffed with innapropriate functionnality. It's the people who wrote the PID1 that are also writing other daemons for extra functionnality, all different parts of the same project.

        • by statusbar ( 314703 ) <jeffk@statusbar.com> on Sunday February 15, 2015 @09:26PM (#49063331) Homepage Journal

          Software mixing you say? It's called dmix.

          Why the fuck do you want to round a *sound mixer* inside your *kernel space* ?! Do you run your video decoder and webbrowser there too ?
          I prefer to run unnecessary things like sound as daemons in userspace. Thank you very much.

          ... Because I need less than 125 microseconds mixing processing latency (12 samples at 96 kHz) so that in-ear monitor mixing for live performance can be useful - requires a total latency from microphone to wireless receiver to CPU to processing to wireless transmitter to in-ear monitor of less than 5 ms. Until Linux user tasks can be scheduled with this kind of hard real time timing accuracy, mixing real time audio in user tasks doesn't cut it for live audio. So I myself am required to do my mixing and processing for real time audio either in the kernel driver, in a RTLinux task (in kernel space), or in a Xenomai task (see xenomai.org ) running at a higher priority than Linux.

          • by davydagger ( 2566757 ) on Sunday February 15, 2015 @11:47PM (#49064005)
            you can. you can re-compile the kernel for low-latency realtime by dicking around with compile time options. you can run jack instead of pulse, and you can have a fairly decent pro-audio production setup.

            That said, we are talking about consumer grade setups, and the default of 350hz timer, and pulse works just fine for that.

            Doing something that much more hardcore, re-compile the kernel, I do believe debian and ubuntu provide low-latency and realtime kernel along with packaging for related programs, and guides do exist for other distros.

            I do believe if you are a highly trained technician, you can be expected to know your tools better than the average consumer who doesn't want to fuck with it. If you're getting paid, its also job security.

          • by DrYak ( 748999 ) on Monday February 16, 2015 @04:00AM (#49064807) Homepage

            ... Because I need less than 125 microseconds mixing processing latency (12 samples at 96 kHz) so that in-ear monitor mixing for live performance can be useful - requires a total latency from microphone to wireless receiver to CPU to processing to wireless transmitter to in-ear monitor of less than 5 ms.

            If low latency in professionnal audio setting is your target, then there's already specialized software for that: JACK.
            It's specially designed for what you want, and as widespread usage in the field.

            Or might as well go for a hardware solution.

            Use the right tool for the right job. Otherwise you end up trying to cram extra requirement into a tool which wasn't designed for it.

            There are even special distribution which are geared toward pro needs and are tuned with this kind of tools.
            (Dynebolic as an example)

        • Why the fuck do you want to round a *sound mixer* inside your *kernel space* ?! Do you run your video decoder and webbrowser there too ?

          Because musicians also use computers, and latency -- which is higher if you're going through user space -- is a big no-no. While some latency is acceptable, any trained musician will easily hear 5 ms latency if he's recording, especially with voice. Since FIR filters and the hardware audio chain already add latency, there's really no room for the mixer to add much. Pro audio is actually a major application for real-time Linux kernels: https://wiki.archlinux.org/ind... [archlinux.org] And saying "but only musicians need thi

        • by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Sunday February 15, 2015 @10:31PM (#49063687) Homepage Journal

          Networked sound playing is just an incident of pulseaudio being a sound router. It's a nice feature, but that's not what pulseaudio was basically written for.

          That's unfortunate, because that's the only thing it actually provides that we didn't have before.

          lots of headphones/microphones now are USB. They are not another channel on the same soundcard, they are a completely different sound driver. Switching when pluging a headset is not something which is trivially done in ALSA without special support of software.

          Another thing which can be done with a small shell script.

          bluetooth, which is VERY common on portable devices (but also might be usefull on dekstops) isn't even a kernel driver.

          But BlueZ does provide an ALSA driver.

          It has much more in common with networked sound than with ALSA.

          Except, you know, that the sound comes through an ALSA driver.

          recording the output of another program becomes much more trivial if there's a sound router handling the redirection, instead of needing some special support in software.

          Special support in software? what do you think pulseaudio is?

          Pulseaudio doesn't require any special support. It can present an ALSA target to any ALSA-enabled software.

          When that works.

          Why the fuck do you want to round a *sound mixer* inside your *kernel space*

          That's OK, there is userspace dmix for the paranoid. But you avoid a context switch by having your sound mixer inside your kernel space. However, if you want to use a floating point mixer, it has to be userspace anyway because politics.

          And you're still free to disable pulseaudio and use dmix instead, if you want.

          Some applications are just using pulseaudio directly for audio now.

          Instead of being vulgar, maybe you should ask yourself why so many distributions are switching to systemd.

          Because upstream software requires it, for poor reasons.

          Also please try to avoid making confusion between the actual piece of code that runs as PID 1 (which is indeed confusingly called "systemd") and all the other pieces of code that add the functionnality mentionned in all systemd articles (these pieces of code are all members of a project which is also called by the same name "systemd", but all pieces of code are completely different deamons like "networkd", "journald", etc.).

          No. I can't ignore the various pieces which are required. I can ignore the non-required bits, though.

          • by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Monday February 16, 2015 @04:27AM (#49064887)

            Another thing which can be done with a small shell script.

            Oh please stop. I can't read much further than this. There were many use cases for linux audio which were either completely absent or plainly broken before Pulseaudio matured (I won't say before it came out, because frankly it was broken when Pulseaudio came out too).

            If you think supporting the range of various event driven realtime changes to the sound destination (i.e. I did something as mind bogglingly complicated as plugging in my headphones while watching a movie) then I'm sure there wouldn't have been an endless list of complaints about the state of linux sound. As far as a general user was concerned, sound was effectively broken. But it's good to know you could write a shell script to fix everything. (I won't draw a comparison to sysvinit here, woopse too late).

            If the problems were as easily solved as you claim the distros would have done it years ago. Except they didn't and were so very keen to migrate to something which did have this functionality that they released Pulseaudio waaaaay before it was ready for primetime (happy to draw a systemd comparison here).

            But feel free to keep wearing your rose coloured glasses as you lament about why we have the things we do know.

        • Jack existed prior to, and has superior functions for (except for one use-case, high latency low power) everything that pulseaudio does.

          When pulseaudio was in development I observed some conversation between poettering and a lead jack developer. It became quite clear that poetterring had little to no idea why some of the design decisions being made at the time were quite crazy. Admittedly some aspects were fixed over the years since pulseaudios adoption, but the immense pain they created from the beginning

      • I used to hate pulseaudio too, until i was forced to use it to get the games i was buying off of steam to have sound.
        Then I found out that if you disable or ignore the network sound feature it mainly boots linux into the modern sound land windows has been since vista. per application volume and speaker configs. per application outputs and recording inputs. it just works.

  • by ponos ( 122721 ) on Sunday February 15, 2015 @05:17PM (#49061685)

    I think it is rather obvious that there should be a way to have more options. Competition is good, choice is good. Can't someone fork a version without systemd? Also, note that other distribution, like Slackware, don't depend on systemd, but the pressure is mounting.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Grishnakh ( 216268 )

      Can't someone fork a version without systemd?

      I agree, choice IS good. However, what I'm seeing so far is a bunch of vocal whiners on Slashdot bitching about systemd, and no one actually stepping up to make a distro that doesn't use it. So what it amounts to is a few loudmouths telling distro maintainers they're wrong, even though the loudmouths don't want to actually do any work on distros themselves.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Yes, if *all* you see are "a bunch of vocal whiners on Slashdot bitching about systemd", then you have a severe problem.

        However, the fact that systemd comes with the "USE US OR FAIL!" dire warning (cf "if you don't use Windows, you can't use our ISP") and appears entirely engineered to intefere with everything on a Linux system, no matter how divorced from SETTING UP THE OS it is indicates that the proponents of systemd have one of two aims:

        Give up on a sustainable Free Software OS.

        Make systemd a required c

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by kthreadd ( 1558445 )

          However, the fact that systemd comes with the "USE US OR FAIL!" dire warning (cf "if you don't use Windows, you can't use our ISP") and appears entirely engineered to intefere with everything on a Linux system, no matter how divorced from SETTING UP THE OS it is indicates that the proponents of systemd have one of two aims:

          This article isn't even about systemd. You can fairly easily use Debian without systemd. This is about libsystemd which is a small library for interfacing with systemd if it is installed. It doesn't depend on systemd so you can have it installed without having systemd itself installed.

      • by sjames ( 1099 )

        Perhaps if you read a news site like slashdot, for example, you would have seen a few articles about people putting such a distro together. You might have even gone the extra mile and subscribed to their mailing list where you would see actual progress being made.

        Nah, it's much easier to just bitch about people who didn't drink your cool aid on slash....HEY! Wait a minute!

        I guess you just delete anything from memory that might keep you from dumping on people!

      • Re:Choice is good. (Score:5, Informative)

        by lkcl ( 517947 ) <lkcl@lkcl.net> on Sunday February 15, 2015 @07:10PM (#49062431) Homepage

        Can't someone fork a version without systemd?

        I agree, choice IS good. However, what I'm seeing so far is a bunch of vocal whiners on Slashdot bitching about systemd, and no one actually stepping up to make a distro that doesn't use it. So what it amounts to is a few loudmouths telling distro maintainers they're wrong, even though the loudmouths don't want to actually do any work on distros themselves.

        that's precisely why i actually worked hard and risked destroying my business by losing access to all data on a critical business laptop, documented the process of removing libsystemd0 from it, and *then* wrote the article.

        unlike the people you refer to, i actually *did something*.

        then, i contacted the devuan team and informed them about what i had done, so that they may consider properly replicating what i'd done as maintainable debian packages. so they now have a way forward where previously they would have been worried that their efforts would result in many people still having to remove huge numbers of packages - desktop GUIs, sane-utils, cups-daemon, pulseaudio and anything that depends on it, clamav and many many more. i've demonstrated that you *don't* have to remove all those packages and that you *can* still have a functioning debian desktop... without libsystemd0 even being on it.

    • Devuan and uselessd (Score:5, Informative)

      by tepples ( 727027 ) <tepples@gmail.TEAcom minus caffeine> on Sunday February 15, 2015 @05:31PM (#49061753) Homepage Journal

      Can't someone fork a version without systemd?

      There's a fork of Debian without systemd [slashdot.org], and there's a project to strip systemd down to the essential parts [slashdot.org].

    • Choice is good. (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I agree, but I am having a hell of a time getting over the initd martyrs. Everything I see about this is written like some kind of revolutionary maniphesto.

      And this is the IMPROVEMENT, before it was just endless vitriol towards Lennart Poettering whose crime was "writing a software package for free", even though he's not the one with the end-say on what packages go in the distribution.

      If they all move to devaun the debian community is going to be getting rid of some of its most vitriolic and insufferable m

    • I think it is rather obvious that there should be a way to have more options. Competition is good, choice is good. Can't someone fork a version without systemd? Also, note that other distribution, like Slackware, don't depend on systemd, but the pressure is mounting.

      It's important to realize that this article is not about systemd, it's about libsystemd which is not systemd. It's a library that is used as an interface to systemd, and Debian has built some of it's packages to depend on it. Note that having libsystemd installed in no ways means that you have systemd installed. It's just a library that won't do anything if systemd itself is not installed.

  • Pointless (Score:5, Insightful)

    by solidraven ( 1633185 ) on Sunday February 15, 2015 @05:18PM (#49061687)
    While it all sounds nice, you do realize 99.99% of the population just sort of wants their computer to work. We don't strictly care too much about your love/despise of some piece of software you didn't pay a dime for, didn't invest any time in writing, and then whine about being used/write love stories to. This sort of behaviour is exactly why projects like a Linux distro, or god forbid GNU/Hurd, never make it to mainstream software. I've said this before, and I'll say it again. If you want the Linux eco-system to be accepted start by getting rid of Stallman, write some damned drivers, make an easy to use system that doesn't require 5 hours of Googling on how to get a laptop soundcard to work. If you invested half the energy you folks use for whining about systemd into actually making an alternative available you might actually get something done.
    • A thousand yeses could not match the rightfulness of this post.
    • Re:Pointless (Score:4, Insightful)

      by steak ( 145650 ) on Sunday February 15, 2015 @05:24PM (#49061709) Homepage Journal

      the problem is that for many, if not most, an alternative to init was neither needed nor desired. if anything systemd is taking talent away from developing your precious drivers in order to develop a solution looking for a problem.

      • Ever realised that it might actually be desired? Its simply that people who disagree are generally a lot more vocal. I have yet to see any unbiased statistics on the well-informed people's opinion of systemd.
      • Re: Pointless (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Billly Gates ( 198444 ) on Sunday February 15, 2015 @05:57PM (#49061909) Journal

        You mean how Sun, Apple, and Ubuntu did not leave init behind years ago

      • by hitmark ( 640295 )

        At this point init is a distraction.

        At present time systemd cotains code for:

        DHCP client
        DNS client
        Cron replacement
        Firewall management
        Inetd
        Network management
        Logind
        Udev

        And likely a fair bit more that i forget.

        All of those however only really function if systemd is running as pid.

        And frankly i think the logind element is what got people sitting up and paying attenotion. I certainly did. Because it replaced consolekit. And while consolekit could live on top of any odd init, logind is wedded to systemd as pid1.

        A

    • Re:Pointless (Score:5, Insightful)

      by RightwingNutjob ( 1302813 ) on Sunday February 15, 2015 @05:39PM (#49061799)
      This post is the prime example of the way people on opposite sides of the debate are talking past each other. Given Linux's historical roots as a hobbyist OS, with almost all of the mid-late 90's spent as an academic OS that gradually worked its way into the enterprise environment by displaying commercial Unix distributions, a very large part of the folks who use Linux use it because it is "harder" to work with which is to say "easier" to tailor to their particular applications away from the desktop.

      I use it on my desktop because I like it, but I learned to like it because I used it in scientific applications where I needed something I could customize and go deep on without being forced to follow Microsoft's or Apple's design decisions or having to fork over tens of thousands of dollars for VxWorks or QNX or HPUX or whatever and some more for ports of software that just happen to already exist in the GNU/Linux/FOSS ecosystem.

      Did it take me a good couple of hours of googling to figure out how something worked? Sure. Lots of times. I'm pretty sure it would have taken me days to get the same result with Windows or Mac, if it was at all possible, becaues those were commercial OS's geared toward nontechnical consumers, with all the ambiguity and flexibility taken out. The most famous example is Steve Jobs deciding that the average luser was too stupid for more than one button on their mouse. But that's cosmetic. There are deep technical places where that sort of limitation does matter.

      So why the bitching about systemd? Well, that core of people, few of whom really cared about widespread desktop adoption to begin with because their attention was spent on backend or niche scientific and technical applications, are seeing the push for Linux On The Desktop take the predictable direction of removing flexibilty from the system and, here's the important bit, forcing other software in the echosystem to remove flexibility to conform to The SystemD Way. Speaking for myself as a decade-long user of Linux, this came out of left field and looks like trying to solve a problem that never really existed for the Linux userbase by removing the very characteristics of the system that attracted folks like myself to use it for scientific and technical applications where Windows and Mac don't cut it and Big Blue and its equivalents are too damned expensive to be worth it.

      So here's how we're talking past each other: you're trying to solve a problem I don't think needs solving, and you don't understand why people who use Linux now use it at all.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Kremmy ( 793693 )
      If you invested half the energy you folks use for whining about systemd into actually making an alternative available you might actually get something done.
      The flaw in this statement is the fact that systemd is replacing alternatives in such a way that it breaks everything if you try to use an alternative. It makes it so being able to use the same alternatives that have existed since long before systemd came about, is no longer an option. It removes the alternatives. Every major piece of software for Lin
      • Then break it, afraid to take a leap of faith? People with more control over this than you have chosen systemd, if you don't like it do something about it: make an alternative available. If enough people agree they'll take you into account, if they don't then you were clearly wrong and you'll have to drop it in a year or two. Instead you're now wasting several hundreds of man years on complaining about it. And by pointing at Gnome you're not exactly convincing me. Gnome is a pest that should have died aeons
      • Re:Pointless (Score:5, Insightful)

        by sjames ( 1099 ) on Sunday February 15, 2015 @07:14PM (#49062459) Homepage Journal

        Pretty much the systemd advocates are running around pissing on everything in the store all the while yelling about how if you don't like piss you should buy simething that hasn't been pissed on. Of course if they see you head for a shelf, they'll do their best to run and piss on it before you get there.

        • No they aren't.

          Rather, the anti-systemd crowd is making up stories about the advocates, slinging vitriol and hatred, and engaging in pretty much any sort of abuse they can engage in towards the systemd developers.

          I have seen few rational, logical, unemotional criticisms of systemd and lots and logs of reactionary bullshit.

    • Re:Pointless (Score:5, Insightful)

      by davydagger ( 2566757 ) on Sunday February 15, 2015 @05:59PM (#49061931)

      If you want the Linux eco-system to be accepted start by getting rid of Stallman

      cold day in hell. To be honest, while I would like linux to be accepted. I'm not getting rid of Stallman, because if we start getting rid of people like him, the GNU/Linux community will just become more like the people we joined this community to get away from.

      More imporant than getting everyone to use Linux, is getting everyone to change how they view the world. Stallman is a smart man, hes actually well spoken, and he digs in and sticks by his ethics, instead of taking a half-assed sleazy way out. He inspires confedence as a voice I can trust to be consistant and ethical, even when no one else is, and doesn't bow to pressure, or sell out core principles.

      If we want to be more like everyone else, and start rejecting people for being ugly, and start accepting people who will sell us a bill of goods, and then find someway to fuck us over first possible chance, its not worth the added user base.

      Also, Free software survives on community effort. Bringing in a bunch of hipsters, will simply bring in hoardes of people who do not contribute, but make demands, sometimes unreasonable, and might try and cause divisions, making work harder. Again, you'll talk about kicking contributers out, to make room for non-contributors.

      write some damned drivers, make an easy to use system that doesn't require 5 hours of Googling on how to get a laptop soundcard to work.

      OK, now you're trolling, linux has had better driver availability than basicly anyone else for the last 5 years. Your simply repeating problems people had pre-kernel 3, which are virtually unheard of.

      I started running Linux because all my drivers just worked, as opposed to running XP at the time, where finding the right drivers was a fucking pain. Also, installing extra drivers on Ubuntu is easy, installing them on windows is hard, and installing them on Macs doesn't happen, at all.

      Oh yeah, and all the codecs "just worked" too, I just clicked a box saying I didn't give fuck all about licensing. Now try doing that in windows, or even mac.

      Or mabey that Ubuntu was the first desktop that had an App store on the desktop, even before apple. Oh, and it worked.

      Or try installing windows on box vs mint/ubuntu/trisquel. Tell me what is easier.

      Are your initials ESR?

    • by devent ( 1627873 )

      First of all, Linux is already mainstream on servers, super computers, embedded systems, smartphones, etc. Second, what have Stallman to do with anything? If there would be no Stallman and GNU, there wouldn't be Linux. But today Stallman don't play a major role in Linux development anymore. Third, a Linux system is pretty easy to use. Just install it and it works. And lastly, no user care one bit about the discussion over systemd. Users are just using what is the default and if it works, it's fine. Sysvinit

    • by jedidiah ( 1196 )

      > While it all sounds nice, you do realize 99.99% of the population just sort of wants their computer to work.

      Exactly!

      Messing around with a fundemental low level part of the system when it is simply not broken is retarded.

      It is true that many of us want our systems to "just work". The problem is that the replacements for initd DON'T DO THAT. They come of as the work of bored children that need a distraction.

      If you want to go on some sort of crusade, actually find something that's an actual problem.

    • While it all sounds nice, you do realize 99.99% of the population just sort of wants their computer to work

      Then use Windows, or OSX. There are systems for people like you. Linux is for people who care about the internals of their OS, and want them to be clean.

      It is a healthy thing we are having this conversation, because it will end up with a better system, or better understanding of that system. We could do without the insults and emotional rants, but those are part of being inclusive (that is, you shouldn't have to be a smooth-talker to participate in open source).

  • by TheGratefulNet ( 143330 ) on Sunday February 15, 2015 @05:21PM (#49061699)

    every so often, I try out the various 'desktops' that linux distros offer.

    every time, I give up, dislike all the procs running, mem wasted, cpu cycles wasted and all the crap that comes with the desktop. feels like bloat that should not be there, not for a 'simple' linux install.

    I always laugh when people look at my display. I use a red/orange color to highlight the active window and grey for the inactive ones. there is no trash icon, no iconbox, no drag/drop. a short menu appears when you click into space (no clients under) and then pick which foreground rxvt opens up (all with black bg's).

    I keep things simple. but I've been using this layout for literally over 25 yrs (starting with twm and using mwm for a short while, when motif was still popular).

    not having a desktop is great. in all that time, I just have not been limited (at all) in what I can do, and things seem to be fast when I just run a term window, type what I want and it instantly runs.

    unix was supposed to be simple. systemd is an abortion and one that most of us do not want.

    good to see this protest post with a hand-tweaked system; but the fact is, we should NOT have to flip over backwards to remove a stupid should-not-be-there-anyway daemon and its evil libs.

    • I mostly use GNOME nowadays but still uses fvwm on my work machine. It's a brilliant window manager but you really need to spend the time learning how to configure it. I like GNOME but it doesn't scale when it comes to managing up to hundreds of windows at the same time.

    • by geoskd ( 321194 ) on Sunday February 15, 2015 @06:21PM (#49062049)

      systemd is an abortion and one that most of us do not want.

      That is simply not true. A VERY vocal minority do not want Systemd on ideological grounds (although I suspect it is more a matter of the new and different scares them, no matter what advantages it may offer)

      The simple fact of the matter is that Systemd does everything, that other init systems do, at least as well, and it does some things that other init systems simply cannot do. If all the popular init systems today had been introduced at the same time, we would all being using Systemd, and no one would have given the others a second thought. The various technical committees have chosen Systemd because on the technical merits Systemd is simply better. There is no argument in favor of the former init systems that cant also be made against all technological progress.

  • FreeBSD (Score:4, Informative)

    by byuu ( 1455609 ) on Sunday February 15, 2015 @05:25PM (#49061723)

    forcing people to consider abandoning the GNU/Linux of their choice and to seriously consider using FreeBSD

    I did just that. It took a few weeks to figure out how to work around all the kinks (as FreeBSD is primarily targeted at the server space), but I'm really glad I did. I have a full Xfce desktop with all of the programs I was using on Wheezy before. Rock solid stability. Might be a bit easier to try PC-BSD to get one's feet wet.

    I've also really grown to like all of the new features: ZFS for easy multi-disk mirroring, encryption, and snapshots; pf for firewall rules; etc. There's also DTrace, jails, etc. The integration with the base utils is wonderful, and the documentation is top notch. I've also found the new package system to work as good as apt-get (pkg install {program-name} and you're done.) I liked it enough that I've even started using it for my servers as well.

    Definitely give it a try if systemd bothers you as well.

    • Rock solid stability.

      Good for you, but heed my warning. In the latter part of the previous decade we too ran FreeBSD. The guy who originally installed was a system admin with severe BSD lust and he singlehandedly pushed for it. We had a specific type of hardware where we could make FreeBSD panic and we could reproduce the crash at will. It turned out that a specific combination of CPU and network card that we had caused the panic. The issue was known and discussed about, but since the number of people who had this specific

      • Full disclosure: It's been many years since I tried FreeBSD, but I rather liked it for the light server install I made.

        Anyway, you make it sound like the participants of the BSD forums were maliciously not helping you, but the reality was probably more like they simply didn't have enough people (or any!) with your hardware combination. This may be a valid concern, especially for a company, but who thinks FreeBSD is trying to realistically compete head-to-head with RHEL (and by extension CentOS) especially

  • All or nothing? Nearly every part of systemd beyond the minimal PID 1 functionality can be switched out with replacement components. Linux users are supposed to be more intelligent, though if that's the case why is it that so many of them seem to have shoved their head up their ass in regards to systemd? Almost every piece of information in the original post is 100% inaccurate and yet nobody is calling the author out on it.

    • This is not even about systemd, it's a about libsystemd which is just a library for interfacing with systemd. You can have libsystemd installed and still don't have systemd itself installed. Debian has built some of their packages so that they depend on libsystemd, so installing them will bring libsystemd with them. Not a problem if you don't want to run systemd, but if you for some reason can't live with dpkg-query -l | grep systemd printing even a single line then this is apparently a problem.

  • by SeaFox ( 739806 ) on Sunday February 15, 2015 @05:31PM (#49061759)

    I thought something was off, feels like it's been a week since the last time I saw an article about systemd (not to be confused with all the other Linus articles that are turned into systemd discussions by commenters).

    • by SeaFox ( 739806 )

      I thought something was off, feels like it's been a week since the last time I saw an article about systemd (not to be confused with all the other Linux articles that are turned into systemd discussions by commenters).

      Bah. Stupid typo.

  • ... In 3,2,1

  • We aren't all "good at coding", or paid to work on Software Libre: that means that those people who are need to be much more responsible, and to start — finally — to listen to what people are saying.

    When was the open source or free software spirit EVER "Have it your way", like some kind of unpaid Burger King?
    You can't vote with your wallet with free software. Unless you pay for it, and my wild guess is most people don't.

    If you can code, you can vote. Maybe. If someone accepts your patches. Not everyone wants to make money either.
    If you can't code, can't pay, and have a problem with what you get - get a job and/or learn to code.

  • by MouseTheLuckyDog ( 2752443 ) on Sunday February 15, 2015 @05:49PM (#49061857)

    Here is what I think will happen:
            At some point Poettering will piss off Linux enough to get him banned from submitting to the mainstream kernel.
            To deal with the problems of no active maintainer of systemd contributing to the kernel, Linus will write his own boot system.
            This system will work better then the sysinit system, but not be anywhere near as onerous as systemd.
            Peace will return to the linux landscape.
     

    • linus is a kernel guy. he self-professes he does not 'like' to setup or manage his own linux systems (strange but true; check out some linus YT videos, there was one at debconf where he talks about it). he says he 'sucks at IT'. system startup is more like IT work than kernel work.

      my guess is that this is not a 'linus thing' and never will be.

    • Yes, I'm sure Red Hat will be kicked out...

  • by Tridus ( 79566 ) on Sunday February 15, 2015 @05:59PM (#49061925) Homepage

    http://imgur.com/gallery/VWUgs... [imgur.com]

    Sums up how I feel about yet another systemd flame war.

  • Really, someone should get a dictionary for their birthday and read the definition for "unilateral" lol.

    • by lkcl ( 517947 ) <lkcl@lkcl.net> on Sunday February 15, 2015 @10:18PM (#49063619) Homepage

      Really, someone should get a dictionary for their birthday and read the definition for "unilateral" lol.

      that's in.... *counts on fingers*... 9? days? :)

      ok so let's look it up... a random google search shows these:

      1. Of, on, relating to, involving, or affecting only one side: "a unilateral advantage in defense" (New Republic).
      2. Performed or undertaken by only one side: unilateral disarmament.
      3. Obligating only one of two or more parties, nations, or persons, as a contract or an agreement.
      4. Emphasizing or recognizing only one side of a subject.
      5. Having only one side.
      6. Tracing the lineage of one parent only: a unilateral genealogy.
      7. Botany Having leaves, flowers, or other parts on one side only.

      yep. definitions 1 through 5 are perfectly relevant. unilateral. meaning that pottering made the decision and (2) did not consult any of us. he claims to be "listening to users" yet (4) in fact ignores everything they tell him and carries on regardless. he has therefore violated the implicit software freedom contract (3) between users and developers who choose to be of service to others.

      so yeah. it would appear that yes i really do know english, if only by accident.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    It got me to put FreeBSD on my to do list for 2015.

  • by HBI ( 604924 ) on Sunday February 15, 2015 @07:01PM (#49062367) Journal

    I was in a meeting last week with some representatives of a large defense contractor and Microsoft. The two of them don't get along well. The defense contractor people (not the MS people) brought up the whole systemd thing as an equalizer between Windows and Linux, and not in a positive way.

    The bottom line is that I have a hard time believing it, but Microsoft is actually making inroads in the server market again. Linux adoption where I work is pretty much stalled, and the things it is used for are mostly virtualization hosts, rather than stuff that actually performs a function. While the systemd thing is just a tiny blip compared to the other reasons this is happening, this shit does not help.

    I'm also not going to waste my own capital evangelizing the OS if significant engineering effort is going into something that is, at least in the short term, reducing the reliability of the operating system. That's a stupid idea and pissing off your evangelists is, too. Everyone forgets where the market share came from...and figures that it is fungible with whatever stupid follow-on idea they have, once they have said share.

    Red Hat is about to learn this the hard way.

  • Give it a rest (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MSG ( 12810 ) on Sunday February 15, 2015 @09:02PM (#49063191)

    We aren't all "good at coding," but we know what init system we want.

    We aren't all "doctors," but we know we don't want vaccines.

    We aren't all "scientists," but we know global warming is a hoax.

    I cannot be the only one sick of seeing this crap posted over and over. systemd is being implemented in distributions because a) it is good and b) the people making that decision are the ones qualified to do so.

    • The people making that decision don't own and operate my servers, so they're not qualified to make that decision for me. I depend on those servers. I do not want them dependent on software that hasn't been in production service for long enough to have all the issues wrung out (and there are always issues when new software goes into production, I don't care how much the dev team may wish otherwise). I'll look at systemd late this summer and see how it's shaking out, and make any decision about adopting it ne

Whenever people agree with me, I always think I must be wrong. - Oscar Wilde

Working...