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

Systemd redux: The end of Linux

blog.lusis.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 464 posts

Re: Systemd redux: The end of Linux

#401

Post by [deleted] »

digi_owl wrote: post #111
simoncion wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you're ovitters, I never claimed that you claimed that Gnome requires systemd. You did -however- say that "...when Gentoo developers tried integrating OpenRC they ran into too many bugs." Your statement is not true. Stable Gentoo had its default init system switched to OpenRC in mid 2011. OpenRC has been great for Gentoo. "Apparently GDM 3.8 assumes that an init system will also clean up any processes it start…

I find myself reminded of a poster at a school toilet: "your mother does not work here, clean up after yourself".

[deleted]

Re: Systemd redux: The end of Linux

#402

Post by SwellJoe »

imanaccount247 wrote: post #297
SwellJoe wrote: post #84

The ignorance in this post runs deep . For example: Speaking of zones and Solaris, if that’s an option for you it’s probably the best of breed stack right now. Does the author have no idea what's going on with Solaris? Hint: Nothing. Nothing is going on with Solaris, because Oracle doesn't care about Solaris. They closed the source, and now push out the occasional minor update from on high for their enterprise custom…

>The ignorance in this post runs deep. The irony there is quite impressive. >Does the author have no idea what's going on with Solaris? Do you? http://wiki.illumos.org/display/illumos/illumos+Home https://smartos.org/ http://openindiana.org/ http://omnios.omniti.com/ Even the commercial Solaris from Oracle is actively updated and a release was done this year. Anyone who is suggesting Solaris is not an alternative to…

Yeah, actually, I do. I maintain a software project with a thousand or so Solaris installations.

Re: Systemd redux: The end of Linux

#403

Post by baldfat »

near wrote: post #396
baldfat wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WAIT you NEVER had an audio problem in Linux before PulseAudio? I would have said the weakest link in Linux on desktop WAS audio. Now PulseAudio was released into the wild too soon by too many distros BUT it has fundamentally fixed what was HORRIBLE in Linux. (Previously a Sound Engineer and Record Studio owner) BUT I would say that Systemd is extremely stable and not broken. What people are complaining about is the…

> WAIT you NEVER had an audio problem in Linux before PulseAudio? To be fair, I didn't say I never had Linux audio issues prior to Pulseaudio (whereas I did say that about FreeBSD.) Back in '98, my SB16 ISA card would only output sound at 8-bit monaural under mikmod, and I could only play CD-audio with that passthrough cable between the CD-ROM drive and the sound card. Once I was able to get sound working well enough…

The thing is that we HAD TO HAVE JACK to over come latency in Linux and MAN that was HARD and once it worked DON'T mess with it or else 3 hours later you had a broken keyboard, mouse and monitor.

The issue was ALSA was HUGE latency to use for anything in recording was just not doable! I had to buy a closed source solution under Windows. Today I could easily do it in Linux.

Re: Systemd redux: The end of Linux

#404

Post by baldfat »

fit2rule wrote: post #342
diltonm wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strange I don't see the issues you're talking about I use Ubuntu Desktop on a variety of desktops and laptops. I'd say PA was stable by Ubuntu 12.04. I do Skype and Google Talkplugin (now Hangouts).

Try using it with JACK and setting up a DAW.. then you'll see the pain.

Thanks you just ruined my Friday remembering those days!!!!

Re: Systemd redux: The end of Linux

#405

Post by Karunamon »

Torgo wrote: post #397
Karunamon wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you've just mentioned here is what scares me most about systemd. Not its tight coupling, not its bugs, not its philosophy - all of these things are arguable and in most cases fixable. The project being run by people who hold unreasonable and downright odious views who act like, frankly, utter asshats , is a much more serious problem. The Kay/Linus debacle is something you can expect to see more of from these fin…

I am not sure if you're referring to this, but I have seen so many instances where an individual joins a community and then systematically tears it apart by calmly and coolly promoting ideas that ~51% kind of like and ~49% absolutely hate, through a combination of personality cult and back-room coalition building. I have seen this happen in forums, IRC channels, RPG groups, businesses. It is a particularly insidious…

Been there and done that.. what's a community to do in such a case?

Re: Systemd redux: The end of Linux

#406

Post by bashinator »

byuu wrote: post #362
icantthinkofone wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Linux Torvalds said he would never have created Linux is FreeBSD was available at the time. And the only reason it wasn't available is because it was embroiled in a lawsuit over embedded ATT UNIX code back in the 1990s(?).

And if Linux weren't available, Lennart would most likely be working on systemd for BSD. Whether or not he would be successful in getting it adopted there is unknowable, but it would be possible. This is why choice is good, and lock-in is so bad.

I don't think it would get adopted in its current form. Systemd is a massive violation of the Principle of Least Astonishment[0].

[0] http://www.unixguide.net/freebsd/faq/16.17.shtml

Re: Systemd redux: The end of Linux

#407

Post by imanaccount247 »

morganvachon wrote: post #376
imanaccount247 wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>In terms of FreeBSD today, while it's possible to use it for daily use, it suffers from even worse driver issues than Linux does No it does not. It has fewer driver issues by far. Because it does not have broken half-assed binary only drivers by obscure vendor X that don't actually work. Unsupported hardware is simply unsupported, rather than broken.

> Because it does not have broken half-assed binary only drivers by obscure vendor X that don't actually work. I've always found it interesting that Nvidia offers a more complete and stable BSD driver than its GNU/Linux counterpart. That said, AMD/ATI support is abysmal, and even Intel video is lacking compared to GNU/Linux. > Unsupported hardware is simply unsupported, rather than broken. That's a matter of interpre…

>If FreeBSD doesn't support my hardware, it's the equivalent of being broken for me, given that I can't use it anyway

That's the point. People like to pretend linux has more hardware support, but mostly what is has is broken drivers for obscure buggy hardware that you can't actually use. The "well supported stable hardware that actually works" list is practically identical between them.

Re: Systemd redux: The end of Linux

#408

Post by jerven »

pdkl95 wrote: post #242
vidarh wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His response seems perfectly reasonable to me - even more so after reading that whole exchange. Why should the Systemd team pay the overhead - in terms of complicating their code - to work around incompatibilities in another libc that will also affect portability of a lot of other Linux software?

The same reason most other project accept trivial patches like that: it's not actually a cost or complication, and helping compatibility and interoperability in the software ecosystem is a good thing. We're not talking about asking for some new work to be done. We're not talking about any kind of change to how the project works. This is about trivial changes like #defining function name that aren't even included in t…

Well in this specific case the patches would have been subtely broken. I.e. replacing a thread safe call with one that is not. So it was not just id deffing (thay even suggest some ways to do that better in the patches. E.g. capability based if def instead of uclib or not)

Re: Systemd redux: The end of Linux

#409

Post by jrapdx3 »

morganvachon wrote: post #376
imanaccount247 wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>In terms of FreeBSD today, while it's possible to use it for daily use, it suffers from even worse driver issues than Linux does No it does not. It has fewer driver issues by far. Because it does not have broken half-assed binary only drivers by obscure vendor X that don't actually work. Unsupported hardware is simply unsupported, rather than broken.

> Because it does not have broken half-assed binary only drivers by obscure vendor X that don't actually work. I've always found it interesting that Nvidia offers a more complete and stable BSD driver than its GNU/Linux counterpart. That said, AMD/ATI support is abysmal, and even Intel video is lacking compared to GNU/Linux. > Unsupported hardware is simply unsupported, rather than broken. That's a matter of interpre…

> ... and even Intel video is lacking compared to GNU/Linux.

Not so sure about that, or maybe it depends on the situation. For instance, I've been running FBSD and Linux in VMs (specifically, Hyper-V/Win 8.1 on a Surface Pro 2).

After updating to FBSD 10.1, I decided to try the Lumina DE (from PC-BSD). I've been surprised at the performance of the GUI under the constrained memory and CPU availability. It's about as good as the host (Windows), albeit running minimally demanding applications.

OTOH Linux versions (SUSE, CentOS) have been much more sluggish and GUI usability much lower. I realize this is impressionistic and hardly a deep analysis. Nonetheless, I think it points out that it's risky to make assumptions when circumstances and system requirements are so tremendously variable.

Re: Systemd redux: The end of Linux

#410

Post by davexunit »

TheLoneWolfling wrote: post #380
davexunit wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>it's a little too esoteric for my tastes Yes, we're still in alpha. Not ready for prime time yet. >Do you know of any Linux distros that a) don't use systemd, b) are vaguely active / supported, and c) run on UEFI? Gentoo? I use Debian most of the time, which of course uses systemd now.

> Gentoo doesn't officially support UEFI

Ah, didn't know that. Thanks!
Post reply on HN