On Sat, 25 Jun 2016 21:01:28 +0200 Didier Kryn <k...@in2p3.fr> wrote:
> Le 25/06/2016 18:34, Steve Litt a écrit : > > My suspicion is that the --without-systemd switch represents a huge > > defeat for Lennart and the Redhats. When Debian decided to switch in > > the summer of 2014, the systemd cartel were strutting and boasting > > that they would soon own the world. > > > > Now, 2 years later, Samba, a bedrock "killer app" for Linux, still > > has a --without-systemd compile option. If Redhat had truly > > succeeded in their plans, such an option would be unneeded and > > useless in 2016. > > Yet I would prefer if there was a --with-systemd option and the > default was without :-) > > Didier That would be my preference too. The point I was making is that the very existence of --without-systemd in 2016 means Redhat did not complete their takeover. Take a time machine back back to September 2014. Debian had kangaroo court approved the switch to systemd and only systemd, unless a few maintainers wanted to do us "greybeards" a "favor" and keep maintaining sysvinit. All the Debian descendants, including Ubuntu, were going along. All of a sudden it was very hard or impossible *work-worthy* non-systemd distro. Lennart was busy gloating about the takeover, and the systemd fanboiz were feeling the juice enough to almost chant "na na na na na" to advocates of init choice. A group calling themselves the Veteran Unix Administrators threw up a web page threatening a fork if Debian didn't walk back their decision, but almost everybody thought this was an empty bluff. The various BSD versions were discussing putting a systemd like thing in *their* software. Things looked bleak: It looked like Redhat would win quickly, mop up, and all work-worthy Open Source operating systems would be systemd. Back around that time, I discovered that my plan B wouldn't work. OpenBSD, which in other ways is one of the finest OSs I've ever worked with, had no support for hardware assisted virtual machines, meaning that any program not available through OpenBSD wouldn't be available at all. It looked like Redhat had won: I began seriously contemplating switching to a Mac, and those of you who really know me know how much that hurt: I have no use for the entire Apple culture. Put in the context of the preceding two paragraphs, the fact that Samba has --without-systemd in June of 2016 is nothing short of a miracle, and nothing short of a repudiation of Redhat's quick victory plans. Of course, if you look at it from today's perspective, it's not miraculous, because you know that the Veteran Unix Administrators went on to back up their supposed bluff with Devuan, stealing a heck of a lot of Debian's mental assets in the process. You know that some Manjaro people came out with Manjaro-OpenRC. You know that Gentoo, Funtoo, Alpine, Void, and I hear Anti-X, as well as several others, stayed put and didn't go to systemd. But anybody in late 2014, who saw Samba's 2016 --without-systemd in a crystal ball, would have jumped for joy. SteveT Steve Litt June 2016 featured book: Troubleshooting: Why Bother? http://www.troubleshooters.com/twb _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng