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

Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release

devuan.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 71 posts

Re: Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release

#51

Post by digi_owl »

tomc1985 wrote: post #49
piokoch wrote: post #12

I am not Linux admin, but I've been using Linux managed by others on servers for many, many years and I have a question: Is that 'systemd' thing is so crucial and important to devote so much effort to create brand new Linux distribution. I have only vague picture what systemd is doing, I can imagine that there could be something better (as always in IT), but is this really that important?

Systemd is very Windows-like.... big central kernel-like thing that provides services, logging, authentication... but what I don't understand is why they anyone would rather have init.d

That is a false dichotomy that gets paraded out again and again. It is not about preserving sysv directly, but that sysv puts the decision to use something else in the hands of the sysadmin, not the distro devs, never mind the systemd devs.

This because the sysv binary itself is small, and a stepping of point for something more elaborate.

OpenRC for example use sysv as the init binary, but builds a services management structure akin to what systemd offers.

Re: Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release

#52

Post by digi_owl »

bigbugbag wrote: post #44
flevo wrote: post #4

Great to see they are making headway. Wonder about the long term sustainability though, as more and more software such as GNOME3 DE lists it as a dependency

Simply do not use gnome 3 and problem solved. It's a mystery to me that people still associate linux desktop with gnome. The gnome project has a long history of not caring about users or developers and prioritizing their view and their brand.

Because Icaza managed to make Qt, and thus KDE, look bad over a licensing shit storm.

It is sadly really how much of Linux DE decisions have been made on political grounds.

Re: Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release

#53

Post by blubb2k »

parent5446 wrote: post #50
ckastner wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They were told to by debian. I don't follow. Are you saying that representatives of the Debian project refused to collaborate with the Devuan developers with regards to improving init system interoperability?

I mean, I think the comment was pretty clear, and that sounds like exactly what they said.

What did "Debian" say exactly? Can you link it?

Or are you just stating what you imagine "they" might have said? :)

Re: Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release

#54

Post by parent5446 »

blubb2k wrote: post #53
parent5446 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, I think the comment was pretty clear, and that sounds like exactly what they said.

What did "Debian" say exactly? Can you link it? Or are you just stating what you imagine "they" might have said? :)

I'm just saying I think that's what the parent comment is saying. As for whether Debian actually said that...well that's anybody's guess.

Re: Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release

#55

Post by AdieuToLogic »

blubb2k wrote: post #53
parent5446 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, I think the comment was pretty clear, and that sounds like exactly what they said.

What did "Debian" say exactly? Can you link it? Or are you just stating what you imagine "they" might have said? :)

This[0] PCWorld article quotes two Debian list email posts which may clarify what "Debian" said.

From one of the email[1]:

  So, this vote effectively gives systemd the win
And the other[2] shows the result of Debian voting on the topic.

0 - http://www.pcworld.com/article/2854717/meet-devuan-the-debia...

1 - https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00338.html

2 - https://vote.debian.org/~secretary/gr_initcoupling/results.t...

Re: Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release

#56

Post by tomc1985 »

digi_owl wrote: post #51
tomc1985 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Systemd is very Windows-like.... big central kernel-like thing that provides services, logging, authentication... but what I don't understand is why they anyone would rather have init.d

That is a false dichotomy that gets paraded out again and again. It is not about preserving sysv directly, but that sysv puts the decision to use something else in the hands of the sysadmin, not the distro devs, never mind the systemd devs. This because the sysv binary itself is small, and a stepping of point for something more elaborate. OpenRC for example use sysv as the init binary, but builds a services managemen…

So do like fifty thousand other linux apps, because nobody seemed to get service management right. The whole reason you are dealing with those problems is because sysv et al were never sufficiently adequate to achieve dominance. I am so glad that there is a future with just one or two service managers to know, because I am sick and fucking tired of having to relearn tech for every stupid linux project...

Re: Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release

#57

Post by blubb2k »

AdieuToLogic wrote: post #55
blubb2k wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What did "Debian" say exactly? Can you link it? Or are you just stating what you imagine "they" might have said? :)

This[0] PCWorld article quotes two Debian list email posts which may clarify what "Debian" said. From one of the email[1]: So, this vote effectively gives systemd the win And the other[2] shows the result of Debian voting on the topic. 0 - http://www.pcworld.com/article/2854717/meet-devuan-the-debia... 1 - https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00338.html 2 - https://vote.debian.org/~secretary/gr_initcouplin…

So, to quote the subject of [1]: "call for votes on default Linux init system for jessie" Note that it says "default", not "only".

Where does that support the claim that Debian would oppose people working on sysvinit support?

Re: Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release

#58

Post by the_why_of_y »

frodob12 wrote: post #30
ckastner wrote: post #13

I never understood why the Devuan developers could not just contribute their work to Debian directly. Yes, systemd had become the default init system, but the idea that other developers would oppose contributions that would do nothing but improve interoperability is just absurd. To me, this whole "we're forking Debian" thing just feels like a strongly emotional opposition to systemd, not rational solution to the init…

They were told to by debian. They argued for as long as they could while debian was still 'their' distribution to change the direction systemd would take it. It was clean that wasn't going to happen. Final response; "If you don't like it you can always fork. But you'll never release anything." So now they have forked and they have released. So now their splitters. Cake and eat it types, what can you do?

Bullshit.

https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2014/08/msg00...

  For the record, the TC expects maintainers to continue to support
  the multiple available init systems in Debian.  That includes
  merging reasonable contributions, and not reverting existing
  support without a compelling reason.

Re: Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release

#59

Post by the_why_of_y »

digi_owl wrote: post #52
bigbugbag wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Simply do not use gnome 3 and problem solved. It's a mystery to me that people still associate linux desktop with gnome. The gnome project has a long history of not caring about users or developers and prioritizing their view and their brand.

Because Icaza managed to make Qt, and thus KDE, look bad over a licensing shit storm. It is sadly really how much of Linux DE decisions have been made on political grounds.

Are you advocating that software such as Qt version 1 as of 1998 that is neither available under a license that meets the FSF's Free Software criteria nor the OSI's Open Source criteria nor Debian's DFSG should be a core part of the GNU/Linux desktop?

Re: Devuan Jessie 1.0.0 stable release

#60

Post by AdieuToLogic »

blubb2k wrote: post #57
AdieuToLogic wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This[0] PCWorld article quotes two Debian list email posts which may clarify what "Debian" said. From one of the email[1]: So, this vote effectively gives systemd the win And the other[2] shows the result of Debian voting on the topic. 0 - http://www.pcworld.com/article/2854717/meet-devuan-the-debia... 1 - https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00338.html 2 - https://vote.debian.org/~secretary/gr_initcouplin…

So, to quote the subject of [1]: "call for votes on default Linux init system for jessie" Note that it says "default", not "only". Where does that support the claim that Debian would oppose people working on sysvinit support?

  Where does that support the claim that
  Debian would oppose people working on
  sysvinit support?
In the body of the other[2] email where 'Option 2 "Support for other init systems is recommended, but not mandatory"' was selected by the Debian community. Once this path was chosen, while it theoretically isn't opposition, in practice it was only a matter of time before non-systemd init systems would become increasingly difficult to use in a systemd-leaning distribution (sysvinit or otherwise).

As Manfred Eigen said:

  In theory, there is no difference
  between theory and practice. But,
  in practice, there is.
(source: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/manfredeig211444...)
Post reply on HN