Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release candidate

lists.dyne.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 75 posts

Re: Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release candidate

#61

Post by petre »

geofft wrote: post #28
petre wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most servers boot really slowly anyway (memory tests, raid cards etc), so why would anyone care if it takes one or ten seconds to boot Linux when the server boots in 120 seconds. Other init systems are capable of restarting things with dependencies as well, like BSD's rcng for instance. I am using runit to supervise my services since I can't rely on systemd.

My experience with sysvinit is that it definitely takes well over ten seconds to boot Linux and start all services, especially if you've been putting "sleep 60" into certain scripts to make boot ordering reliable. Again, I'm comparing systemd to pre-systemd Linux distros (including Devuan, which explicitly continues that tradition), not to systems broadly comparable to systemd. If Devuan had a different fancy init sy…

Why would you sleep 60 when you have runlevels and startup order?

Re: Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release candidate

#62

Post by petre »

lomnakkus wrote: post #36
Koshkin wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> value of standardization But the Linux community has always prided itself on freedom and diversity. Otherwise we might as well be all using one "standard" Linux distribution.

There are things that are worth diversifying on. Basic subsystems that only serve to keep the OS running is not one of them -- the benefits of standardization far outweigh the costs of lack-of-diversity. (Of course this is just my opinion, yours may differ.) As to freedom: I'm not sure what you're driving at here. Can you expound?

When everybody standardizes on possibly the worst implementation available for that platform, then it is worth diversifying.

Re: Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release candidate

#63

Post by petre »

throw2016 wrote: post #34
lomnakkus wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haven't heard of this particular issue, but my main point is that the reaction should then be: "Ok, so let's fix that in systemd, upstream systemd .service files or whatever, and it gets fixed for everybody all at once.". The reaction should not be "systemd sucks!". That is the real value of standardization. EDIT: As far as I can tell as an outsider systemd is at least engineered well enough that these things can be…

We have all these 'words' like standardization, fragmentation, duplication that sound good but seem unworkable in open source without creating a monolith. There is a real risk this approach ends up concentrating power and influence and destroying dynamism. I suspect Linux would not have got to where it is with 'gatekeepers'. For proper standardization the design and development has to be done openly with the collabor…

I kind of better like the current Linux community without a backwards standard body, where everyone can write their own stuff and use it. It's just like early flight where anyone with a bike workshop could build a flying machine out of bicycle parts if they wanted to.

Re: Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release candidate

#64

Post by [deleted] »

lomnakkus wrote: post #43
throw2016 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was actually talking about standardization. If Systemd seeks to be a standard then Redhat would have to give up control to a 'independent standards body' where others can influence the design, development and direction of the 'standard' outside the influence of Redhat and its employees. That seems to be the only credible way to create workable standards. Open source ecosystems clearly do not yet have the thinking a…

Ah, sorry. I was using standardization in the "de facto" sense. I think the "forking threat" applies nonetheless as long as RH doesn't at least broadly go along with the "committee" of the (F)OSS community. Honestly, I don't really see how they would extract any value from not doing that, so I'm mildly mystified by all the "they're trying to take over the world" rhetoric. EDIT: Aside: Honestly, I don't see much value…

[deleted]

Re: Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release candidate

#65

Post by petre »

jakeogh wrote: post #55
nextos wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For systemd-less distros, I really like GuixSD. A functional approach & Scheme for all stuff is a big plus.

Gentoo also works with or without systemd, and the dev's maintain a nice udev replacement, eudev.

Yes but you need to compile everything. Gentoo is like a lab distro. OpenRC and eudev are nice things that came out of that lab.

Re: Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release candidate

#66

Post by petre »

e12e wrote: post #29
Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think Debian/kFreeBSD is a better path. Is there an assumption that once Debian decided to go with systemd and an increasing amount of Debian standard software depended on it, the kFreeBSD port will have to be given up at some point?

Well, that's one way to look at it. Another way to look at it, is that when "all of Linux" went with systemd, there'd be little real interest and help upstream in various packages to port to "linux-without-systemd" - but as long as open Solaris (by any name), free-, net- and openbsd exist - there's likely to be some help with porting to a world without systemd.

What makes is so hard to write init scripts or run scripts or unit files for a daemon?

Of course, when you irreversibly mess things up by adding a hard dbus dependency, integrate udev in the init system, put systemd-resolved on 127.0.0.53 everywhere plus tons of other mess, then of course it's hard to "port" everything because you messed everything up so badly that it only works with your init system now.

Re: Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release candidate

#67

Post by jakeogh »

petre wrote: post #65
jakeogh wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gentoo also works with or without systemd, and the dev's maintain a nice udev replacement, eudev.

Yes but you need to compile everything. Gentoo is like a lab distro. OpenRC and eudev are nice things that came out of that lab.

True, but I rarely notice. You can set buildpkg to keep the binary packages around for new deployments if necessary. It's not LFS:)

Re: Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release candidate

#68

Post by lomnakkus »

Koshkin wrote: post #60
lomnakkus wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are things that are worth diversifying on. Basic subsystems that only serve to keep the OS running is not one of them -- the benefits of standardization far outweigh the costs of lack-of-diversity. (Of course this is just my opinion, yours may differ.) As to freedom: I'm not sure what you're driving at here. Can you expound?

I think freedom and diversity simply do not exist one without the other. Freedom of choice that has been essential in making Linux popular in the first place may be severely limited by imposing more and more "standards"; I would argue that the very spirit of Linux lies exactly in this freedom. This is why we have so many distributions; and the more we standardize, the less need there is for this diversity, which, I t…

Ah, yes, the old

> freedom and diversity simply do not exist one without the other.

"freedom and diversity" defense. Nobody's trying to take that away, FWIW.

It may feel threatened, but I assure you that systemd is the least of your worries if you really care about F&D.

Re: Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release candidate

#69

Post by e12e »

petre wrote: post #66
e12e wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, that's one way to look at it. Another way to look at it, is that when "all of Linux" went with systemd, there'd be little real interest and help upstream in various packages to port to "linux-without-systemd" - but as long as open Solaris (by any name), free-, net- and openbsd exist - there's likely to be some help with porting to a world without systemd.

What makes is so hard to write init scripts or run scripts or unit files for a daemon? Of course, when you irreversibly mess things up by adding a hard dbus dependency, integrate udev in the init system, put systemd-resolved on 127.0.0.53 everywhere plus tons of other mess, then of course it's hard to "port" everything because you messed everything up so badly that it only works with your init system now.

Yeah, it's not the init scripts that are a problem, it's everything else, like keeping gnome working without logind etc.

Re: Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release candidate

#70

Post by nextos »

zzalpha wrote: post #46
nextos wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Functional administration, not just implementation. Most sysadmin operations are non-destructive. This has huge implications.

Care to elaborate? This is a very vague statement taken in its own, and the GuixSD website does no better at explaining their real life value prop...

All system configuration and packages are described declaratively. You can roll back and forth between system definitions.
Post reply on HN