141–150 of 284 posts
Can we as a community move on from this? If someone feels like forking a distro "because systemd", let them, and it's only newsworthy if it's successful. We could also move on from the accusations of "betraying the Unix philosophy". You know what else is the Unix philosophy? User-based security model. Fixed-length strings without overflow checks. World-readable passwords, badly hashed. Unencrypted remote shell with h…
I don't care what init system is used. I care about a GUI workstation experience.
This whole UNIX experience is long lost in GNU/Linux distributions.
Just go out and install an Aix, HP-UX, Solaris, Tru64, DG/UX... system and see what the real UNIX experience looks like.
From the article: We are excluded from voting on the issue: only few of us have the time and patience to interact with Debian on a voluntary basis. Using the same argument, forking would seem like a horrible idea if there isn't active maintainers.
Until I saw that line, I was thinking: well quit talking about doing it, and just do it!
The idea of a non-systemd distribution in general is something I've been expecting to pop up for a while. And if the vocal people online represent a real desire not to switch, then one really should exist. Beyond that I'm rather uninterested in such a project one way or another.
The trouble here is that the bulk of the work is just maintaining a changeset to debian packages. They haven't even spun up dak and friends, so I'm assuming this is DOA for now. It seems like a lot of hot air to pressure debian, or at the least attract contributions that can maintain their fork. Is "fork" a scary word to any DD, considering debian is already the upstream distribution for other, more popular, derivatives?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I dare you to tell my why lxc-docker silently fails to start at boot in jessie. Without a single shred of clue in any log, no matter what logging options are turned up - at least with a shell script I can add some echo/exit/touch etc. statements to convince myself it's at least being noticed at startup: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/docker-user/bg5-hlmR...
> I dare you to tell my why lxc-docker silently fails to start at boot in jessie. Without a single shred of clue in any log, no matter what logging options are turned up - at least with a shell script I can add some echo/exit/touch etc. statements to convince myself it's at least being noticed at startup: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/docker-user/bg5-hlmR... . Have you tried adding "touch" commands in ExecS…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
on the contrary, systemd is a feature desired by system administrators, who are responsible for installing and managing most debian and debian-based distros.
I'd rather not be forced to use something because some people decided it's "what system administrators want."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I dare you to tell my why lxc-docker silently fails to start at boot in jessie. Without a single shred of clue in any log, no matter what logging options are turned up - at least with a shell script I can add some echo/exit/touch etc. statements to convince myself it's at least being noticed at startup: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/docker-user/bg5-hlmR...
Does the official package not work for you? https://packages.debian.org/jessie/docker.io Even the docker page tells you to use the docker package for Jessie: https://docs.docker.com/installation/debian/
Debian has always seemed to be about choice. You can even run it (for now, at least) on the FreeBSD kernel if you so choose. Obviously they are going to have to require systemd for Gnome 3.14+, but I see no reason not to allow installing a different init system for people managing headless LAMP servers via SSH, if there is an appropriate amount of developers willing to maintain the necessary packages for this. Onto d…
And that's the issue. See my earlier comments:
From the article: We are excluded from voting on the issue: only few of us have the time and patience to interact with Debian on a voluntary basis. Using the same argument, forking would seem like a horrible idea if there isn't active maintainers.
Using the same argument, forking would seem like a horrible idea if there isn't active maintainers. Until I saw that line, I was thinking: well quit talking about doing it, and just do it! The idea of a non-systemd distribution in general is something I've been expecting to pop up for a while. And if the vocal people online represent a real desire not to switch, then one really should exist. Beyond that I'm rather un…
There's already plenty of them.
I'm a devop, not a system administrator. I setup and administered a number of single machine web services for my customers along the years, almost all of them with Debian plus some Ubuntus recently. Database, application server, web server. Nothing fancy. I also use Ubuntu as my primary desktop (some sort of gnome fallback DE) after I removed a lot of cruft if comes with by default. From my experience what I need on…
> A fork, or an alternative init system, could be a good solution. I consider this a good idea. Servers and desktops are two different things so why not have two different Debian versions? This way Debian Server could be kept small and simple while the systemd developers could continue without any restrictions. If they go too far then we could use the Debian server and add our own desktops to it.