> Kevin, you seem to be fairly advanced user. How about creating a vm with
> Arch and getting an alternative to udev running?
Seems is probably the right word. We are all fools fiddling in the dark
to some degree with different ground covered. Some of us have more
powerful torches and some keep to the lit roads more ;-)
You might find this hard to believe and maybe arch wasn't the
best choice (but not too bad so far) but a large reason of coming to
Arch was to reduce my time spent on admin and not increase it and I
can't afford any time at the moment. I don't really have an issue with
udev, it breaks little and is perfectly replaceable. Build time will
increase now but more options will become more prominent or it will fork
if it isn't suitably maintained. The kernel is unlikely to break
anything :-) on purpose or for a long time 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'
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 6:22 AM, Leon Feng <rainofchaos@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2012/8/22 Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>:
>> Maybe, maybe not, but is it the right choice *now*? That's the question.
>
> Some upstream package are start to require systemd support. Udev,
> Polkit is just an example.
And I say this is extremely bad news. Make GTK+ depend on GNOME, and
guess what will happen: people will stop using GTK+ (or fork it). Make
PolicyKit depend on systemd and people will stop using it.
I for one look forward to alternatives to udev, systemd and Polkit
(and all the packages that depend on systemd).
And let's remember that not every Arch Linux user uses Polkit (right?).
> This is not Arch decision. It is the decision made by upstream. Arch
> just follow the trend.
> Add as the poll shows: More Arch users(80%) agree with upstream for this change.
Yes, they agree with the change, but the poll doesn't ask *when* this
change should happen.
> There are indeed some corner cases that systemd not support. This is
> exact the reason Arch should encourage users to try systemd out. If
> there is indeed problem, they can just remove init= kernel parameter
> and report it, wait for it been fixed.
Yes, people should be trying systemd *now*, but what happens if in the
small percentage of users that are doing this you can already see
problems? This should hint that the move to make it the default should
be delayed for *later*.
Cheers.
--
Felipe Contreras
08-22-2012, 12:06 PM
Felipe Contreras
Arch Linux and systemd
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 12:16 PM, Guus Snijders <gsnijders@gmail.com> wrote:
> Op 22 aug. 2012 10:59 schreef "Kevin Chadwick" <ma1l1ists@yahoo.co.uk> het
> volgende:
>>
> Kevin, you seem to be fairly advanced user. How about creating a vm with
> Arch and getting an alternative to udev running?
I do this all the time with buildroot; udev is a choice, and I often
have trouble compiling it because it depends on so many things, like
specific kernel configurations, and certain toolchain options. The
fact of the matter is that udev doesn't do much for me,
CONFIG_DEVTMPFS=y and CONFIG_DEVTMPFS_MOUNT=y does most of the job,
the rest is loading the right modules at boot time, which can be done
with a simple script. There's also mdev from busybox, but it's too
simple, I don't really understand what is the point of it.
But there's certainly people that don't use udev at all:
http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Mdev
Cheers.
--
Felipe Contreras
08-22-2012, 02:46 PM
Jakob Herrmann
Arch Linux and systemd
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
egin{quote{}
Add as the poll shows: More Arch users(80%) agree with upstream for
this change.
end{quote}
Source?...And which poll? I don't remember that some has been opened.
Cheers,
Jakob
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
On 08/22/2012 10:46 AM, Jakob Herrmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> egin{quote{}
> Add as the poll shows: More Arch users(80%) agree with upstream for
> this change.
> end{quote}
> Source?...And which poll? I don't remember that some has been opened.
>
> Cheers,
> Jakob
>
It was a poll started by a member in another thread on this list (titled
"SystemD poll")
Here is the link:
http://www.easypolls.net/poll.html?p=502d2113e4b02c3adb09a939
--
Andre Goree
andre@drenet.info
08-22-2012, 08:12 PM
Guus Snijders
Arch Linux and systemd
Op 22 aug. 2012 14:07 schreef "Felipe Contreras" <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
het volgende:
>
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 12:16 PM, Guus Snijders <gsnijders@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > Op 22 aug. 2012 10:59 schreef "Kevin Chadwick" <ma1l1ists@yahoo.co.uk>
het
> > volgende:
> >>
>
> > How about creating a vm with
> > Arch and getting an alternative to udev running?
>
> I do this all the time with buildroot; udev is a choice, and I often
> have trouble compiling it because it depends on so many things, like
> specific kernel configurations, and certain toolchain options. The
> fact of the matter is that udev doesn't do much for me,
> CONFIG_DEVTMPFS=y and CONFIG_DEVTMPFS_MOUNT=y does most of the job,
> the rest is loading the right modules at boot time, which can be done
> with a simple script. There's also mdev from busybox, but it's too
> simple, I don't really understand what is the point of it.
Looks like i need to do some catching up ;-). Udev has worked fine for me,
so my interest is mostly academic.
Just in case, it's always good to learn about alternatives.
Thanks.
mvg, Guus
08-22-2012, 10:07 PM
Kevin Chadwick
Arch Linux and systemd
> > I do this all the time with buildroot; udev is a choice, and I often
> > have trouble compiling it because it depends on so many things, like
> > specific kernel configurations, and certain toolchain options. The
> > fact of the matter is that udev doesn't do much for me,
> > CONFIG_DEVTMPFS=y and CONFIG_DEVTMPFS_MOUNT=y does most of the job,
> > the rest is loading the right modules at boot time, which can be done
> > with a simple script. There's also mdev from busybox, but it's too
> > simple, I don't really understand what is the point of it.
>
> Looks like i need to do some catching up ;-).
Udev used to do a lot more but a lot of it's functionality was taken
into the kernel for a more sane design and after much constructive
flaming ;-). It's on lwn.net.
'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'
I think these discussions will not change the result for Arch. Sooner
or later Arch will have to seperate its way from its KISS philosophy.
While the main approach of Arch is to use vanilla software, as
possible; Arch devs have to follow upstream decisions and at some
point Arch and other distros fall into software those hide things from
end users. I think most of the main upstream software (take systemd,
KDE, GNOME and others) trying to be corporate software. Not all
upstream decisions are good but we have to follow them. My two
cents...
08-23-2012, 11:12 AM
Kevin Chadwick
Arch Linux and systemd
> trying to be corporate software.
I've been wondering what the best term for 'corporate' or 'enterprise'
software like exchange is where they change your nappies for you but
also offer you razor wire to hang yourself with by giving you IE to
browse the web on the mail server itself and encouraging compulsory
remote wipe for clients!
'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'
egin{quote}
While the main approach of Arch is to use vanilla software, as
possible; Arch devs have to follow upstream decisions and at some
point Arch and other distros fall into software those hide things from
end users. I think most of the main upstream software (take systemd,
KDE, GNOME and others) trying to be corporate software. Not all
upstream decisions are good but we have to follow them. My two
cents...
end{quote}
So which components (obviously used by the majority of Arch users) do
currently have or will soon have hardcoded! dependencies to systemd?
As far as i can say, Gnome doesn't and if it will, there is still the
possibility for everyone to either patch it, to install it along with
systemd or just to use an alternative. Folks always confront me with
the argument of more and more hardcoded dependencies, but I can't find
them and am still happy without systemd (besides the udev thing which
in fact isn't such a thing).
Cheers,
Jakob
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
Arch Linux and systemd
