Am 19.10.2013 17:02, schrieb Daniel Campbell: > On 10/17/2013 11:27 PM, Mark David Dumlao wrote: >> https://www.linux.com/news/featured-blogs/200-libby-clark/733595-all-about-the-linux-kernel-cgroups-redesign >> >> Not sure if I read that just right... but since nobody is doing cgroup >> management besides systemd, in practice the cgroups implementation in >> Linux wasn't very consistent. So since systemd is doing it, their work >> is helping shape the kernel's cgroups api? >> >> Interesting... >> > >From my perspective it looks like systemd developers are trying to push > their ideas into the kernel, almost like they intend to merge systemd > *with* the kernel.
from what I read in the article cgroups are a mess and are cleaned up anyway. The only real user of cgroups at the moment is systemd. Others are welcome to make use of cgroups too. But in the current state nobody blames them for not jumping in. > If systemd is the only implementation of cgroups and > their developers are working on cgroup support in the kernel, it spells > calamity given their history of evangelism and zealotry. well, going over some old ml threads on fedora mailing lists all I could find was that Poettering and Sievers DID listen and DID make changes if the demand was high enough. Sure, I dislike systemd. Sure what happened with udev was a dick move. But their 'zealotry' is a lot less developed than the zealotry of those who exploded about using an 'init-thingy' in the future. > > I truly wish I understood why a single userland program and its > developers are being given the keys to an entire subsystem of the > kernel. they aren't. > Their changes to udev have proven to be a headache for users, yes? which ones? > and the kernel is held to a much higher standard of stability and > interoperability. In addition, the top-level developers of systemd (and > GNOME, and the now-deprecated consolekit/polkit/udisks/etc) are employed > by a for-profit company (Red Hat), which has a vested interest in > shaping Linux as a platform. They and other corporations cannot be > trusted with stuff like this... hm, Redhat is one of the companies investing the most money into linux kernel, userland, graphics... if you 'don't trust them' you are pretty much 20 years too late. > > I'd like to see what Linus has to say about this if/when he finds out. > He's not impressed with Sievers or Poettering. Personally I'd like to > see them ostracized from the community and contained to their own > distro, where they belong. > so much about zealotry.
