Russell Stuart <russ...@stuart.id.au> writes: > On Tue, 2015-01-20 at 21:22 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Pretty sure there's no dependency on journald. I think you have to use >> systemd's syslog passthrough if you're launching systems under systemd >> as an init system (although I'm not 100% sure about that even), but >> that's not the same thing as journald or the journal itself, and that's >> systemd as an init system, not logind, which can run separately. > No, the dependency is unavoidable. Try running "sudo journalctl" some > time - you will the stuff that it has written under to /run/log. I thought you could turn that off too if you wanted to, but I must admit that I never cared enough to investigate. > I am not comparing us to Microsoft. We hold us to higher standards than > that. Well, I don't mean to be argumentative here, but I think this is a bit disingenous. When you use the term "lock-in," comparing systemd to Microsoft, or at least IBM or other old-school monoliths that used vendor lock-in as a strategy, is *exactly* what you're doing, whether you intend to do so or not. This is the emotional baggage and historical weight that term carries. If you mean to make some other criticism, consider using other words. > Journald it an excellent starting point for a discussion on lock in. > After all why are we forced to use a binary logging just because Looks like you sent this prematurely, but I'll pre-emptively say that I just don't buy this argument at all. You're "forced" to use binary logging in much the same way that Linux is "forcing" you to use serial ports because it's hard to not get a /dev/ttyS1. If you don't want it, ignore it, or modify the code to not create it if you care enough. Let me be a little more explicit and blunt here. The WHOLE POINT of the DFSG and the free software movement was to prevent lock-in systematically via our licensing terms. systemd is using those licensing terms, and is not software-as-a-service or fallling into any of the other gaps that have been much-discussed. It's old-school, old-style free software in which you get the source and the code and there is no third party or remote service involved. So either those licensing terms and the foundation of the free software movement are inadequate to their purpose even for software that's straight in the middle of the original target area for free software, or systemd is not lock-in. I know which of those I think is the case. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87k30goye9....@hope.eyrie.org
