I think it is fine that T.J.Duchene gives his opinion, although I
disagree with him. I'm very optimistic about Systemd-free Linux, so
optimistic that I think Devuan is simply preparing the future of Debian.
The reason why RedHat develops and enforces systemd is clear to me:
they have customers paying for a ready-made system that RedHat would
maintain. They want to increase their productivity by introducing tools
which automate things as much as possible, plus security-related
features -- a valid sales argument. It makes full sense; that's their
busyness model.
But what are Debian maintainers/developpers working for? OK they
try to provide an OS that's usable out of the box, but for who?
Everybody, they claim, but this includes primarily people like
themselves, geeks and hackers. And they likely will see geeks and
hackers run away. Debian has taken a very wrong decision but they're
going to have chances to change it.
Didier
Le 03/02/2015 10:10, R.M. Thomas a écrit :
On 03/02/15 07:04, dng-requ...@lists.dyne.org wrote:
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 00:21:06 -0600
From: t.j.duch...@gmail.com
To: dng@lists.dyne.org
Subject: Re: [Dng] What's new in Systemd
Message-ID: <2216145.ytyAqhlZeR@workstation>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
On Monday, February 02, 2015 11:32:52 PM dng-requ...@lists.dyne.org
wrote:
Devuan is probably going to have to provide some form of
compatibility in the future. This will be the case, regardless of how
you or I might feel on the subject, especially if kdbus gets
integrated into the Linux kernel. If that happens, it might as well
be "game over" for systems that do not provide at least a shim.
By all means then, let Devuan provide a shim, at least in the short
run.
I think that uselessd or FreeBSD's compatibility projects are
probably the most likely solutions.
And you're on this list why?
Seriously, T.J. why?
Hey, Steve!
Don't get me wrong here, I'm just expressing the _opinion_ that Systemd
compatibility is going to be a greater problem down the road,
especially since
it seems likely that upstream projects, including the Linux kernel
itself
(via kdbus) are headed in the direction that they are.
I was suggesting that some way of trapping systemd calls and
resolving them
will have to become a part of the system, even if Devuan does not
have systemd
itself. Otherwise, a lot of code is going to be have to dropped from
the
distribution or forked as time goes on.
I was suggesting that systembsd's efforts might be of value in this
area.
Apparently, just saying that is annoying some people, and I apologize
for
that. Perhaps you are right, and it would be best if I kept my
opinions to
myself.
T.J.'s opinions make a lot of sense to me and I suspect also to others
reading this list. Many people who have in the past relied upon
Debian Linux as a solid platform for doing productive work are now
looking at various alternatives in the face of the systemd phenomenon,
and some of these people are sure to be subscribing to the DNG mailing
list in the hope of seeing some good news.
I suppose FreeBSD is the obvious first destination for Debian
refugees, and personally I am actively exploring that solution at the
moment. But it would be very nice indeed if the Devuan project can be
made to succeed, as Devuan would provide an attractive way of
leveraging the ongoing vigorous development of the Linux kernel. I
should remark that I am prepared to do more than wish the Devuan
project well: in the longer term I am willing to assist actively in
testing and coding if it turns out that I am capable of contributing
positively.
--Mike
_______________________________________________
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
_______________________________________________
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
