FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > ArchLinux > ArchLinux General Discussion

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 08-15-2012, 07:56 AM
Gaetan Bisson
 
Default Think twice before moving to systemd

[2012-08-15 03:35:15 +0200] Felipe Contreras:
> it became clear I was on my own

Isn't life tough?

And seriously, who do you think gives a damn about platitudes like

> If you have a problem you will not be able to open a script and figure
> out what is happening, and perhaps modify it, and debug it.

anymore? Even "discussions" here have gone past that argument. How about
before writing to this list next time you read it for a while and see if
you can learn a thing or two?

> I was expecting more from the Arch Linux community

Believe me, we were expecting more from you too.

--
Gaetan
 
Old 08-15-2012, 09:59 AM
Kevin Chadwick
 
Default Think twice before moving to systemd

> > So I think Arch Linux will probably hit issues, and you think it's FUD
> > to say "hey Arch Linux, I think you might hit issues"?
> >
> You have “issues”. Your thread title, your baseless extrapolation of your own
> experience to all of Arch are classic FUD.[0]

If you look in a dictionary often a term will have many definitions. One
for FUD would likely be "a term often used by some to dismiss valid
concerns offhand". You haven't added anything, such as many of the pro
systemd posts.

--
__________________________________________________ _____________________

'Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work
together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a
universal interface'

(Doug McIlroy)
__________________________________________________ _____________________
 
Old 08-15-2012, 10:09 AM
C Anthony Risinger
 
Default Think twice before moving to systemd

On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 2:39 AM, Tom Gundersen <teg@jklm.no> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Felipe Contreras
> <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Well, I see absolutely no evidence of such an analysis, so consider me
>>>> a skeptic.
>>>
>>> That's ok. We are not in the PR business, we are not selling anything.
>>
>> You are selling a distribution.
>
> We are? Damn. Where is my cut. Allan!?

:-)

it's interesting to me how so many can believe that
OSS/distros/etc/etc are really driven and decided by the whimsical
desires of the complete, mob-like user base.

open, collaborative development has only 5% to do with feel good
all-for-one-and-one-for-all type shitz, and 95% to do with the needs
of the investing/funding/contracting user-base, and/or the
itches/scratches/interests of developers capable of architecting
useful tools from mere ideas and/or hot air.

example: in the last ~2 months i've contributed code to ~4 different
projects: 3 were fulfilling a *business* need for the company that
employs me, relating to AMQP and [gag] SOAP, which frankly i could
care less about and would actually prefer if they faded away forever
... but no, i FURTHERED them, because that's what the requirements
called for; another project is a popular Python application server,
and was furthered for both business and personal/pleasure reasons
(interesting); only 1 was purely for fun, relating to Python -> JS
translation ... a real challenge ...

alas, even the one for fun i did for *me* -- not to sound like an ass,
but i don't much give two shitzs about everyone else's needs less they
contribute competent code, or at the very least, competent thought and
constructive ideas. a little respect goes a long way ...

... and on that same vein, i have next-to-nil patience for whining.
the point of this ramble-esque message is to highlight the fact that
90% of what i output is business related, 30-40% of that is shit i
wish would evaporate, and 10-20% is my personal
interests/free-time-development (which i abandon and find other
projects once it becomes boring and/or "un-fun")

SO! truth is the commercial fedoras/redhats and ubuntus out there are
all a vibrant part of this process, and they WILL supply/shoulder the
bulk of development. buck up folks! just get used to it! Arch plays
a part too (yay python2 symlink! ;-) in various capacities, but
software research/development and long-term maintenance of decadent
tools is NOT that part. why? because Arch is part of the 10-20%
section of most developer's time -- ehm, you know, the part where they
do what they !@#$%^& want -- so suck it up and make clear/concise
contributions of code/thought/reason as best you can ... because this
endless droning on REiddly-little-wah-wah-problems makes for really
fscking boring reads.

--

C Anthony
 
Old 08-15-2012, 10:15 AM
Kevin Chadwick
 
Default Think twice before moving to systemd

> I tried systemd a while ago in a brand new machine with Arch Linux and
> the boot was *much slower*

It can be slower on embedded too, the reason is suspected to be maxing
out a cheap processor. We are talking about instant on here which is
only an issue if systemd becomes a requirement which it will never be
for Linux but maybe without forking Arch or switching.

--
__________________________________________________ _____________________

'Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work
together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a
universal interface'

(Doug McIlroy)
__________________________________________________ _____________________
 
Old 08-15-2012, 10:23 AM
Kevin Chadwick
 
Default Think twice before moving to systemd

> SO! truth is the commercial fedoras/redhats and ubuntus out there are
> all a vibrant part of this process,

True

> and they WILL supply/shoulder the
> bulk of development.

Wrong, there have been more commits from independents in the Linux tree
in the last decade atleast.

--
__________________________________________________ _____________________

'Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work
together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a
universal interface'

(Doug McIlroy)
__________________________________________________ _____________________
 
Old 08-15-2012, 10:37 AM
Geoff
 
Default Think twice before moving to systemd

On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 05:09:29 -0500
C Anthony Risinger <anthony@xtfx.me> wrote:

<snip>
> it's interesting to me how so many can believe that
> OSS/distros/etc/etc are really driven and decided by the whimsical
> desires of the complete, mob-like user base.
<snip>

All points taken, and, for my own part, I do not complain about the free product
of other people's efforts. On the other hand, I suppose that many devs take
at least some pride in the number of users who gratefully take advantage of
their work. If that is right. then they might not object to someone explaining
(politely, briefly, once), why the direction they are taking might lead the
person concerned reluctantly to use something else instead. How they respond
to such opinions is, of course, entirely a matter for them.

Geoff
 
Old 08-15-2012, 11:56 AM
Felipe Contreras
 
Default Think twice before moving to systemd

On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 12:09 PM, C Anthony Risinger <anthony@xtfx.me> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 2:39 AM, Tom Gundersen <teg@jklm.no> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Felipe Contreras
>> <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Well, I see absolutely no evidence of such an analysis, so consider me
>>>>> a skeptic.
>>>>
>>>> That's ok. We are not in the PR business, we are not selling anything.
>>>
>>> You are selling a distribution.
>>
>> We are? Damn. Where is my cut. Allan!?

I wonder why you are purposely using the (clearly) unintended
definition of the word 'sell'. Just to make things clear:

a : to develop a belief in the truth, value, or desirability of : gain
acceptance for <trying to sell a program to the Congress>
b : to persuade or influence to a course of action or to the
acceptance of something <sell children on reading>

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sell

> it's interesting to me how so many can believe that
> OSS/distros/etc/etc are really driven and decided by the whimsical
> desires of the complete, mob-like user base.

I am not saying such a thing at all. I am fully aware that
contributors do their contributors mostly to scratch their own itch.
But while scratching your own itch you are often scratching other
people's itches, perhaps inadvertently (the 'invisible hand' theory).

However, that's as a *contributor* to the project. The project itself
needs contributors to survive, and keep moving, without contributors
there's no users, and without users there's no project (and no
contributors as well, as contributors most of the time are users
first).

It's fine to say "we don't target the common type of Linux user", but
you have to have at least some idea of what your users are, and what
they want, otherwise the project will never be truly successful. If
you both attract and repel your users (inadvertently), you might get
periods when the projects seems alive and thriving (as I think it is
right now), and then just experience a quick death (as the users that
came to Arch Linux for X will quickly realize they were 'deceived' and
go away). The advantages of having a healthy user-base are numerous,
but if I have to explain them I feel there's no point in discussing.

The biggest thing any program can do is not the technical details
of the program itself; it’s how useful the program is to users.
So any time any program (like the kernel or any other project),
breaks the user experience, to me, that’s the absolute worst failure
that a software project can make.
-- Linus Torvalds

Cheers.

--
Felipe Contreras
 
Old 08-15-2012, 11:58 AM
Baho Utot
 
Default Think twice before moving to systemd

On 08/15/2012 03:39 AM, Tom Gundersen wrote:

On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Felipe Contreras
<felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:

Well, I see absolutely no evidence of such an analysis, so consider me
a skeptic.

That's ok. We are not in the PR business, we are not selling anything.

You are selling a distribution.

We are? Damn. Where is my cut. Allan!?

-t


I saw your cut....... why it's just over there ----->
 
Old 08-15-2012, 12:05 PM
Felipe Contreras
 
Default Think twice before moving to systemd

On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Leon Feng <rainofchaos@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2012/8/15 Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>:
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Tom Gundersen <teg@jklm.no> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Felipe Contreras
>>> <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I don't have that machine available at the moment, but I don't see how
>>>> such an issue could have been fixed given the lack of interest from
>>>> Lennart in that G+ post.
>>>
>>> Without the insults, this would have been picked up on and sorted out
>>> a long time ago. At least based on my experience.
>>
>> That's a loss for systemd, not for me. And I didn't insult anybody,
>> Lennart did, so it's not my fault.
>>
>>>> I do read and write
>>>> C everyday for probably for more than 10 years now, yet I do have
>>>> trouble reading systemd's code, but that's not important, what is
>>>> important is that in order to test my modifications (to add debugging
>>>> for example), I would need to *recompile*.
>>>
>>> I'm aware that you are a professional, that's why I find your claims
>>> about the difficulty of understanding/recompiling... odd. By contrast,
>>> my C skills/experience are virtually nonexistent, and yet I have had
>>> no problems understanding/debugging/recompiling/patching the systemd
>>> code.
>>
>> It's not my claims, it's a fact; compiling is more complicated than
>> not-compiling (one step less), and you need a compiler, and linker
>> (and in some systems development packages), and sometimes deploying
>> the binaries. With scripting you don't need any of that; after you are
>> done editing the text (which you have to do regardless), you are done.
>>
>>>> Well, I see absolutely no evidence of such an analysis, so consider me
>>>> a skeptic.
>>>
>>> That's ok. We are not in the PR business, we are not selling anything.
>>
>> You are selling a distribution. When Arch Linux stops giving the users
>> what they want, the users will go for a different distribution. That's
>> how distributions die; when something better is on the market for most
>> of their users.
>
> Arch is always give user's their options they want.
>
> You can use initscript, even if systemd is the default just like I can
> use systemd now when initscript is the default. Switch from one to
> another is very easy. So use systemd as default does not means you
> can not use initscript.

This is not what I've been reading on the mailing list. People want to
get rid of initscripts, as maintaining both would be a "burden", and
certain projects behave differently with or without systemd (wedge
strategy).

--
Felipe Contreras
 
Old 08-15-2012, 12:28 PM
Gaetan Bisson
 
Default Think twice before moving to systemd

[2012-08-15 13:56:22 +0200] Felipe Contreras:
> The biggest thing any program can do is not the technical details
> of the program itself; it’s how useful the program is to users.
> So any time any program (like the kernel or any other project),
> breaks the user experience, to me, that’s the absolute worst failure
> that a software project can make.
> -- Linus Torvalds

Fuck you!
-- Linus Torvalds

--
Gaetan
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:42 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org