On 02/15/2014 11:32 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: > On Feb 15, 2014 11:02 AM, "Tanstaafl" <tansta...@libertytrek.org > <mailto:tansta...@libertytrek.org>> wrote: >> >> On 2014-02-15 10:16 AM, Tanstaafl <tansta...@libertytrek.org > <mailto:tansta...@libertytrek.org>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Not to revive a flame-fest against systemd, but... >>> >>> I'm sure some or most of you have already heard about this, but I found >>> a really decent thread discussing this whole systemd thing. It is only >>> really comparing systemd and upstart, as that was the debate going on in >>> the debian TC, but it is a great read, and has actually made me rethink >>> my blind objections to systemd a bit. >> >> >> One of which was logging: >> >> "20. Myth: systemd makes it impossible to run syslog. >> >> Not true, we carefully made sure when we introduced the journal that > all data is also passed on to any syslog daemon running. In fact, if > something changed, then only that syslog gets more complete data now > than it got before, since we now cover early boot stuff as well as > STDOUT/STDERR of any system service." >> >> From: http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html > > Also, for those of you who don't follow Linux-related news, Ubuntu will > also change to systemd in the future: > > http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1316 > > And I *heard* that Slackware was also discussing the possibility, but > since I don't follow Slackware at all, I don't know for sure. > > Anyway, distros not using systemd, and that they are not really small > and/or niche, seem to be disappearing. The discussion that Tanstaafl > posted is interesting since the arguments used by the four TC members > are really focused on the technical merits of the proposed init systems. > > Regards. > -- > Canek Peláez Valdés > Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación > Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México >
The lack of foresight on social and political ramifications is epidemic to most of the FOSS world, as evidenced by the creeping adoption of systemd. Things are already depending on things that systemd provides, and is dividing the ecosystem into "systemd" vs "everything else". Ambitious projects like systemd are damaging to the rich variety that should be found in the FOSS ecosystem. systemd in particular encourages embracing vertical integration and rejection of POSIX and UNIX principles. Its culture is adversarial to anyone who doubts the Great Image that Lennart and his employer has. If it were a project that was humble, without an agenda, and did not undergo evangelism, I'd have no problems with it because choice is something that I value immensely. But because it *isn't* humble, *has* an agenda, only reached the adoption it currently has by *lots* of arguing and pushing, and refuses to coexist with other init systems, I cannot respect it as a legitimate, non-aggressive, non-intrusive software project. I consider it a toxic threat to FOSS and refuse to have it on any system I maintain. systemd has technical merits (cgroups, socket activation, parellel execution of daemons, etc), but they fall by the wayside and become irrelevant to me when it swallows the functionality of multiple projects that should be separate (see: udev) and tries to be everything to everyone (splash image, web server, boot time graphs, etc). The social tactics at work from the systemd team (and verily, other Red Hat projects like GNOME) are reminiscent of Microsoft through the use of the "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" methodology. With their paid developers and more abundant resources, Red Hat (and arguably other corporations) can use their developers to push their agendas and, in a sense, commandeer control of the FOSS world. I will give them no inch on my systems. I am skeptical of their involvement in the kernel, as well. It's sad to see Debian giving into peer pressure. I honestly thought that they would see the agenda miles away and prevent a monoculture. For people who are technically intelligent, they're seriously lacking any foresight in their decisions and are completely blind to the social and political ramifications. Distros will regret depending on such a project and it will set GNU/Linux development back many years when systemd becomes a full stack and working without it is made difficult or impractical (through the use of lock-in tactics). I hope that Gentoo continues to be a safe haven for choice and the spirit of FOSS. Without it, I may have to concede and either start building my own distro, or going to the BSDs. Just my two cents. Ignore or reply at your discretion.
