Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   Gentoo Development (http://www.linux-archive.org/gentoo-development/)
-   -   Any official position from Gentoo about systemd, mdev and udev-static ? (http://www.linux-archive.org/gentoo-development/698488-any-official-position-gentoo-about-systemd-mdev-udev-static.html)

Sylvain Alain 08-28-2012 03:35 PM

Any official position from Gentoo about systemd, mdev and udev-static ?
 
Hi everyone, I don't want to start a flamewar on that subject, but I would like to know if there's any official position about the current situation.

I saw on the forum this thread : https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-934678-highlight-.html and maybe it could be part of a solution to have OpenRC and udev together.


So, is there any developments lately ?

Thanks !

d2_racing

--
Salut
alp
Sylvain

Rich Freeman 08-28-2012 03:47 PM

Any official position from Gentoo about systemd, mdev and udev-static ?
 
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Sylvain Alain <d2racing911@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone, I don't want to start a flamewar on that subject, but I would
> like to know if there's any official position about the current situation.

There is not. But thanks for starting the flamewar just the same. :)

>
> I saw on the forum this thread :
> https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-934678-highlight-.html and maybe it
> could be part of a solution to have OpenRC and udev together.
>

I'm sure nobody would object to somebody putting it in the tree -
somebody just has to do it, or start their own overlay. The systemd
folks would seem to prefer to just bundle udev with systemd anyway,
making it a virtual.

Gentoo is about choice.

Perhaps some day installing a sysvinit implementation will be like
installing a cron daemon. Or, perhaps it will become a nightmare as
the various forks all strive to make life as difficult as possible for
anybody using the "wrong" one.

> So, is there any developments lately ?

Uh, probably only about 500 emails in the last two months. I'd
suggest reading the archives, but they'll probably look like the
archives on every other distro -dev mailing list.

Rich

Ian Stakenvicius 08-28-2012 03:59 PM

Any official position from Gentoo about systemd, mdev and udev-static ?
 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 28/08/12 11:47 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Sylvain Alain
> <d2racing911@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi everyone, I don't want to start a flamewar on that subject,
>> but I would like to know if there's any official position about
>> the current situation.
>
> There is not. But thanks for starting the flamewar just the same.
> :)
>

SYSTEMD OR DEATH!!!

..err..

UDEV FREEDOM FOREVER!!!

...

(that about covers it, yeah? so we can all move on now?)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)

iF4EAREIAAYFAlA86t4ACgkQ2ugaI38ACPBuHQD9FsdNxrjY6U TTpHkp81IkSrcl
z0HaPLKC9Ju1orRaQQgA/10Yn29tSt54yc8ieftOeAK2v9+rX4rbl17cLKy+TYOL
=86v4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Matthew Thode 08-28-2012 04:59 PM

Any official position from Gentoo about systemd, mdev and udev-static ?
 
On 08/28/2012 10:35 AM, Sylvain Alain wrote:
> Hi everyone, I don't want to start a flamewar on that subject, but I would
> like to know if there's any official position about the current situation.
>
> I saw on the forum this thread :
> https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-934678-highlight-.html and maybe it
> could be part of a solution to have OpenRC and udev together.
>
> So, is there any developments lately ?
>
> Thanks !
>
> d2_racing
>

Maybe something to get at least some general direction from council,
though probably too technical.

--
-- Matthew Thode (prometheanfire)

Jeff Horelick 08-28-2012 05:03 PM

Any official position from Gentoo about systemd, mdev and udev-static ?
 
On 28 August 2012 12:59, Matthew Thode <prometheanfire@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 08/28/2012 10:35 AM, Sylvain Alain wrote:
>> Hi everyone, I don't want to start a flamewar on that subject, but I would
>> like to know if there's any official position about the current situation.
>>
>> I saw on the forum this thread :
>> https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-934678-highlight-.html and maybe it
>> could be part of a solution to have OpenRC and udev together.
>>
>> So, is there any developments lately ?
>>
>> Thanks !
>>
>> d2_racing
>>
>
> Maybe something to get at least some general direction from council,
> though probably too technical.
>
> --
> -- Matthew Thode (prometheanfire)
>

I think this issue is currently in far too murky of a state to get any
well-informed issue from the council. Perhaps when the issues get
hammered out a bit more, but not currently.

Rich Freeman 08-28-2012 05:35 PM

Any official position from Gentoo about systemd, mdev and udev-static ?
 
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Jeff Horelick <jdhore@gentoo.org> wrote:
> I think this issue is currently in far too murky of a state to get any
> well-informed issue from the council. Perhaps when the issues get
> hammered out a bit more, but not currently.

I tend to agree. Taking a position for or against some piece of
technology doesn't really make sense. Making a decision on some
implementation detail that has a real impact on the distro makes
sense.

It is hard to anticipate what kinds of crises will continue to arise.
So, best to deal with them one at a time. Of course, it would be best
if the various package maintainers could talk to each other to
anticipate issues BEFORE they arise. If upstream wants to rename or
move half their binaries and the maintainers want to follow upstream,
I don't have a big problem with that per se, but at least talk about
it on the lists before unmasking things/etc.

Best to keep the council decisions actionable. And it is probably
best to let the directly impacted maintainers be the ones to appeal to
the council if the concern is breakage/etc.

If we were less of an enthusiast/choice distro then the obviously
solution would be to just ship a working udev and wait and see how the
whole mess works itself out elsewhere. It will be messy for a while
for Gentoo, because we generally strive to be "interesting." :)

Rich

Luca Barbato 08-28-2012 05:36 PM

Any official position from Gentoo about systemd, mdev and udev-static ?
 
On 08/28/2012 05:35 PM, Sylvain Alain wrote:
> Hi everyone, I don't want to start a flamewar on that subject, but I would
> like to know if there's any official position about the current situation.

udev might or might not eventually get forked to avoid systemd
borg-approach.

mdev works fine for a number of people and they are working on getting
better support for it even if some guys sometimes try to stomp over them
for silly reasons.

openrc during the summer got new features developed both for prefix
users and for general public hopefully will get merged soon.

The consensus is trying to support what makes sense of systemd and let
people use it if they really want but not force it upon people happy or
needing openrc.

Beside that you have drama since there are strong opinions on how broken
systemd is or how cool it is.

> I saw on the forum this thread :
> https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-934678-highlight-.html and maybe it
> could be part of a solution to have OpenRC and udev together.
>
> So, is there any developments lately ?

Lots =)

lu

Ben de Groot 08-29-2012 05:06 AM

Any official position from Gentoo about systemd, mdev and udev-static ?
 
On 29 August 2012 01:36, Luca Barbato <lu_zero@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 08/28/2012 05:35 PM, Sylvain Alain wrote:
>> Hi everyone, I don't want to start a flamewar on that subject, but I would
>> like to know if there's any official position about the current situation.
>
> udev might or might not eventually get forked to avoid systemd
> borg-approach.
>
> mdev works fine for a number of people and they are working on getting
> better support for it even if some guys sometimes try to stomp over them
> for silly reasons.
>
> openrc during the summer got new features developed both for prefix
> users and for general public hopefully will get merged soon.
>
> The consensus is trying to support what makes sense of systemd and let
> people use it if they really want but not force it upon people happy or
> needing openrc.
>
> Beside that you have drama since there are strong opinions on how broken
> systemd is or how cool it is.
>
>> I saw on the forum this thread :
>> https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-934678-highlight-.html and maybe it
>> could be part of a solution to have OpenRC and udev together.
>>
>> So, is there any developments lately ?
>
> Lots =)
>
> lu
>

I think this is a fairly good overview of the current situation.

The way I see it:

Gentoo defaults to OpenRC and stand-alone udev. This is not going to
change any time soon.

Because some developers think systemd is a worthwhile alternative,
they are making it possible for Gentoo users to switch to using this
if they want to. Gentoo is about choice, after all.

But there is also strong opposition towards systemd and the "our way
or no way" attitude of its core developers, so it is unlikely Gentoo
will adopt systemd. It would be too controversial and lead to a rift
in the developer community.

For now udev is still usable without systemd, even tho upstream is
making it difficult to build udev separately (and avoid unnecessary
build-time dependencies). Upstream is also unwilling to work with us
to make this easier.

Despite upstream promises that udev will remain usable stand-alone,
there is a lot of skepticism towards that. So we may find ourselves
faced with the need to use a fork or a replacement for udev.

Right now the situation is in flux, so we are basically waiting to see
how things will develop.
--
Cheers,

Ben | yngwin
Gentoo developer
Gentoo Qt project lead, Gentoo Wiki admin

Duncan 08-29-2012 10:35 AM

Any official position from Gentoo about systemd, mdev and udev-static ?
 
Ben de Groot posted on Wed, 29 Aug 2012 13:06:29 +0800 as excerpted:

> For now udev is still usable without systemd, even tho upstream is
> making it difficult to build udev separately (and avoid unnecessary
> build-time dependencies). Upstream is also unwilling to work with us to
> make this easier.
>
> Despite upstream promises that udev will remain usable stand-alone,
> there is a lot of skepticism towards that. So we may find ourselves
> faced with the need to use a fork or a replacement for udev.
>
> Right now the situation is in flux, so we are basically waiting to see
> how things will develop.

Yours and Luca's summaries LGTM. Two comments/observations and one
question, tho. Question first, at the top:

Question:

For those who have actually built it, what *IS* the full systemd relative
merge-time, and how does that compare to that of pre-merge udev?

I doubt that most people consider udev's stand-alone build-time a big
issue. It's not like a gcc update, or firefox, or the classic example,
OOo/LO. Building/installing udev has always been relatively trivial.

Just how much worse are we talking if we DO end up having to build nearly
all of systemd, only to throw out most of it, just keeping udev? If it's
just 50% more than udev by itself, or even double, while having to build
all of systemd just to throw out most of it is irksum in principle, in
practice, for most, it wouldn't be a big deal. (Yes, there's the
underpowered minor archs where it would be, but even there,
relatively...) Ten times the build/install time, however, and it's
rather more of an issue. 20 or 50 times, and it's a much *BIGGGER* issue.

So in practice, just what are the sorts of times, relative to stand-alone-
build udev, we're talking about? In all this discussion, what, hundreds
of posts by now?, I've not seen ANYONE actually ask, let alone answer,
THAT. But it would seem to be a rather important question...

Comments/observations (mostly rehash for those who read the other thread,
feel free to skip to the next post):

1) On gentoo, "usable standalone" by definition means reasonably
buildable, standalone, ideally without going to extreme lengths via
complex and exotic ebuild/eclasses to do it. That's rather different
than upstream's definition of "usable standalone", which they did
promise, but which to them simply means the already built binary (as
found in systemd-based distros for use in their initr*s before switching
to real-root, where systemd is found, that being the specific example
they gave) will continue to function on its own -- they have in fact
specifically stated that they have absolutely NO interest in keeping it /
buildable/ stand-alone, or in cooperation with distros like gentoo who
find that IS in their interest.

Given that difference in definition for "usable standalone", it's with
good reason that gentooers generally view that upstream claim with
extreme skepticism.

2) But my primary point in an earlier thread on the topic still stands.
Gentoo's current udev/openrc default simply can't and won't be changed on
a dime. Even if gentoo chose to do it today and the project was given
extreme priority, we're looking at at LEAST a year, more like two. And
by 2-3 years out, if Linux/FLOSS history is any guide, the whole
ecosystem will look different, and we'll have a whole list of new changes
and challenges to worry about, so somewhere between 3-5 years out, the
picture simply gets way too fuzzy to predict any more, and throwing the
dice has about as good a chance. So with no plans to immediately change
gentoo's position, it's a pretty safe bet that any changes of that size
that WOULD occur are safely out beyond that three-year horizon where
things start getting fuzzy, and beyond that, it's anyone's guess.

--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman

Rich Freeman 08-29-2012 11:37 AM

Any official position from Gentoo about systemd, mdev and udev-static ?
 
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 6:35 AM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:
> And
> by 2-3 years out, if Linux/FLOSS history is any guide, the whole
> ecosystem will look different, and we'll have a whole list of new changes
> and challenges to worry about,

Agreed. I suspect the status quo will remain in place for a while.
If somebody forks udev and a bunch of distros switch to the fork, that
could shake things up, although that could get really messy if the two
projects start to diverge since we'd need compatibility layers for
packages that use udev since either might be installed (only to the
extent that they diverge).

What I see as the most likely thing to lead to change is if/when
GnomeOS actually starts to exist. When you can't run Gnome without
systemd I'd expect to see a lot more Gentoo users running it. Then
again, if Gnome jumps the shark, maybe not.

In any case, seems best to just take the hurdles as they come.

Rich


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:42 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.