Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
Em 12-02-2014 13:59, Gregory H. Nietsky escreveu: On 02/12/14 18:43, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote: This does not invalidate your comment, but I think it is always good when a source code becomes open. Even if it did, I would not get particularly upset. The comment I made was pushing the envelope. For me, nouveau does what is expected of it. But for many others it doesn't seem to. Very often there are discussions on blfs-support that go something like this: The flip side of all this is simple logic linux users avoid certain hardware when there are no sutiable open source drivers sure its a small [but growing] % of the market. If this was the logic from the beginning, would linux ever exist? At least Nouveau would not certainly exist. BUT a very vocal % im no actuary or statistician [Folks remember smoking is the leading cause of statistics] This is another marketing lie. i hope they did this cause they nice guys with ubuntu but i suspect there motives were greed. With this, I agree. i applaud not the company for open sourcing it but the linux community for been the linux COMMUNITY. not sure we should applaud them for finally doing the right thing or just been neutral and stand proud of the comunity. And I applaud them, too. For me, it does not matter the motive, if some code becomes open, it deserves applauses. -- []s, Fernando -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 19:27:50 +0100 From: Armin K. kre...@email.com To: BLFS Development List blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org Subject: Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd On 10.2.2014 13:04, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: I thought it would be worth sharing what I have just read. Perhaps not everybody knows about it yet. 1. Debian votes for systemd https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00338.html And seems that systemd has won. - and Debian and Linux lost. ( - if, that is, that outcome is finalised and carried through, once/if they sort out some of the aspects of their 'process'.) It'll be interestingly amusing to see how the ride goes for you sysd folks - and boy, you're going to be taken for a ride; enjoy. For everyone else: Popcorn? Meanwhile, here, as noted we don't need to use anything like sysd, and for _at least_ the very long foreseeable either; sysd in its present form won't be around by then anyhow. We _have_ experience with sysd for a few years now, on machines and with src-code and with the doc-sets: and it's really not near to being in an acceptable medium-/long- term adoption state - and won't be if its present structure and ideologies persist in anything like their present forms. As noted before, what'll likely happen is that sizeable chunks of sysd will be found to be not quite the solution they were fanboied to be, get split apart or reworked as separate items or 'deprecated', whether 'in-house' (by the then-maintainers) or by '3rd-parties'; while some of the reasonable ideas and goals will be morphed and absorbed by others into proper (sub-)sets of solutions. That's not mere 'whistling in the dark'; it's just very often how stuff happens in practice; and sysd is a fairly obvious candidate for that - and sooner rather than later. There's always enough folks around to call time on crap and on 'one true vision' proponents and their followers: sysd and linux are not immune from that. rgds, akh https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00405.html 2. NVIDIA contributes to open-source drivers(nouveau) http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2014-January/053028.html -- -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 17:44:23 +0100 From: Armin K. kre...@email.com To: BLFS Development List blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org Subject: Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd . . [...] not spotting it earlier, I just woke up when I wrote this response. The rest still stands. - the first two are taken as fairly self-evidently true, and the third the opposite, from yr posts on at least sysd matters. rgds, akh -- Note: My last name is not Krejzi. -- -- -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 07:44:10 -0300 Fernando de Oliveira fam...@yahoo.com.br wrote: This does not invalidate your comment, but I think it is always good when a source code becomes open. Even if it did, I would not get particularly upset. The comment I made was pushing the envelope. For me, nouveau does what is expected of it. But for many others it doesn't seem to. Very often there are discussions on blfs-support that go something like this: OP: Help, I'm trying to use nouveau! LFSer #1: Do this. LFSer #2: Do that. /me: It works for me, try thus. OP: Doesn't work. LFSer #1: Try this #2. LFSer #3: Try that #2. OP: Still doesn't work. /me: Yes it does. OP: No it doesn't. Giving up. The only sane conclusion that can be drawn is that for some people it doesn't work. Why, I am unable to comment. -- Svi moji e-mailovi su kriptografski potpisani. Proverite ih. All of my e-mails are cryptographically signed. Verify them. -- You don't need an AI for a robot uprising. Humans will do just fine. signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
On 02/12/14 18:43, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote: This does not invalidate your comment, but I think it is always good when a source code becomes open. Even if it did, I would not get particularly upset. The comment I made was pushing the envelope. For me, nouveau does what is expected of it. But for many others it doesn't seem to. Very often there are discussions on blfs-support that go something like this: The flip side of all this is simple logic linux users avoid certain hardware when there are no sutiable open source drivers sure its a small [but growing] % of the market. BUT a very vocal % im no actuary or statistician [Folks remember smoking is the leading cause of statistics] leaving the linux comunity sounding more authoritive than others and when a user wants a system often the opinion they hear is that of the linux user if its the office sysadmin or the Geek cousin ... basically not open sourcing affects sales not only into the linux community but also into the general market space. i hope they did this cause they nice guys with ubuntu but i suspect there motives were greed. i applaud not the company for open sourcing it but the linux community for been the linux COMMUNITY. not sure we should applaud them for finally doing the right thing or just been neutral and stand proud of the comunity. Greg -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by Distrotech Solutions, it is believed to be clean. http://www.distrotech.co.za -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
On 02/12/14 18:43, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote: This does not invalidate your comment, but I think it is always good when a source code becomes open. Even if it did, I would not get particularly upset. The comment I made was pushing the envelope. For me, nouveau does what is expected of it. But for many others it doesn't seem to. Very often there are discussions on blfs-support that go something like this: The flip side of all this is simple logic linux users avoid certain hardware when there are no sutiable open source drivers sure its a small [but growing] % of the market. BUT a very vocal % im no actuary or statistician [Folks remember smoking is the leading cause of statistics] leaving the linux comunity sounding more authoritive than others and when a user wants a system often the opinion they hear is that of the linux user if its the office sysadmin or the Geek cousin ... basically not open sourcing affects sales not only into the linux community but also into the general market space. i hope they did this cause they nice guys with ubuntu but i suspect there motives were greed. i applaud not the company for open sourcing it but the linux community for been the linux COMMUNITY. not sure we should applaud them for finally doing the right thing or just been neutral and stand proud of the comunity. Greg -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by Distrotech Solutions, it is believed to be clean. http://www.distrotech.co.za -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
Em 10-02-2014 20:15, Aleksandar Kuktin escreveu: On Mon, 10 Feb 2014 09:04:24 -0300 Fernando de Oliveira fam...@yahoo.com.br wrote: I thought it would be worth sharing what I have just read. Perhaps not everybody knows about it yet. 2. NVIDIA contributes to open-source drivers(nouveau) http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2014-January/053028.html 'Bout fucking time. Now cue asskissers (Ars Technica, Wired and many, many others) praising Nvidia for engaging with the community et cetera while at the same time forgetting to mention that Nouveau *first* became fully functional and only then did Nvidia bother to lift a finger. For me, might be good news. Had problems with nouveau, reverted to proprietary. One problem, I clearly remember. A broken machine could stay alive for many days, perhaps weeks, but not with nouveau: failed even to complete boot, due to the temperature rising above threshold. From my problems, I concluded that it was functional, but not fully. This does not invalidate your comment, but I think it is always good when a source code becomes open. -- []s, Fernando -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
On 10.2.2014 13:04, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: I thought it would be worth sharing what I have just read. Perhaps not everybody knows about it yet. 1. Debian votes for systemd https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00338.html And seems that systemd has won. https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00405.html 2. NVIDIA contributes to open-source drivers(nouveau) http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2014-January/053028.html -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 19:27:50 +0100 Armin K. kre...@email.com wrote: On 10.2.2014 13:04, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: I thought it would be worth sharing what I have just read. Perhaps not everybody knows about it yet. 1. Debian votes for systemd https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00338.html And seems that systemd has won. https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00405.html Democratic technologies in action. BTW, http://igurublog.wordpress.com/2014/02/02/ubuntu-to-dump-nautilus-wants-your-input/ snip In open source, you can’t lock people out of the code like you can in Windows. But you can make the system so complex that no one can control it at a lower level without being a developer with lots of time to spare. I think ultimately that’s what this is about. And the systemd tool stack will likely eventually be used for DRM and other restrictive technologies (just as HAL was). /snip -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
On 12.2.2014 5:37, Petr Ovtchenkov wrote: On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 19:27:50 +0100 Armin K. kre...@email.com wrote: On 10.2.2014 13:04, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: I thought it would be worth sharing what I have just read. Perhaps not everybody knows about it yet. 1. Debian votes for systemd https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00338.html And seems that systemd has won. https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00405.html Democratic technologies in action. BTW, http://igurublog.wordpress.com/2014/02/02/ubuntu-to-dump-nautilus-wants-your-input/ As a GNOME Apps user, I must admit that Nautilus has seen better days. It's understandable that they want a Qt file manager especially since their Unity 8 is targeting Qt too and it will be running on Mir. I for one have switched from Nautilus to Nemo (Nautilus 3.6-ish fork). snip In open source, you can’t lock people out of the code like you can in Windows. But you can make the system so complex that no one can control it at a lower level without being a developer with lots of time to spare. I think ultimately that’s what this is about. And the systemd tool stack will likely eventually be used for DRM and other restrictive technologies (just as HAL was). /snip I'm really interested in the DRM part. Please tell me how HAL was used for DRM? HAL was free software as I recall, but has become too complex to maintain or add new features, thus U* friends were born (well, DeviceKit first, then U* friends). Do you got any links that elaborate how/if HAL was used for DRM? -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
On 02/12/14 15:53, Armin K. wrote: On 12.2.2014 5:37, Petr Ovtchenkov wrote: On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 19:27:50 +0100 Armin K. kre...@email.com wrote: On 10.2.2014 13:04, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: I thought it would be worth sharing what I have just read. Perhaps not everybody knows about it yet. 1. Debian votes for systemd https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00338.html And seems that systemd has won. https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00405.html Democratic technologies in action. BTW, http://igurublog.wordpress.com/2014/02/02/ubuntu-to-dump-nautilus-wants-your-input/ As a GNOME Apps user, I must admit that Nautilus has seen better days. It's understandable that they want a Qt file manager especially since their Unity 8 is targeting Qt too and it will be running on Mir. I for one have switched from Nautilus to Nemo (Nautilus 3.6-ish fork). snip In open source, you can’t lock people out of the code like you can in Windows. But you can make the system so complex that no one can control it at a lower level without being a developer with lots of time to spare. I think ultimately that’s what this is about. And the systemd tool stack will likely eventually be used for DRM and other restrictive technologies (just as HAL was). /snip I'm really interested in the DRM part. Please tell me how HAL was used for DRM? HAL was free software as I recall, but has become too complex to maintain or add new features, thus U* friends were born (well, DeviceKit first, then U* friends). Do you got any links that elaborate how/if HAL was used for DRM? Funny you should ask this. The other week, my wife was complaining to me that see could not view certain videos. It turned out that these were Flash. After further investigation, it turned out that certain Flash videos do have DRM, and that hal was/is required to decode them. I ended up build this package: https://build.opensuse.org/source/devel:openSUSE:Factory/hal-flash/libhal1-flash_0.2.0rc1.tar.gz , which is a cut down version of hal, specific for flash. See README file. See also http://github.com/cshorler/hal-flash Regards, Wayne. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
[blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
I thought it would be worth sharing what I have just read. Perhaps not everybody knows about it yet. 1. Debian votes for systemd https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00338.html 2. NVIDIA contributes to open-source drivers(nouveau) http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2014-January/053028.html -- []s, Fernando -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 09:04:24 -0300 From: Fernando de Oliveira fam...@yahoo.com.br To: BLFS Development List blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org Subject: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd I thought it would be worth sharing what I have just read. Perhaps not everybody knows about it yet. 1. Debian votes for systemd https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00338.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00342.html , 'et seq' no doubt. akh 2. NVIDIA contributes to open-source drivers(nouveau) http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2014-January/053028.html -- []s, Fernando -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page -- -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
On 02/10/14 14:04, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: I thought it would be worth sharing what I have just read. Perhaps not everybody knows about it yet. 1. Debian votes for systemd https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00338.html as much as i think systemd is a stinking pile ... for debian [read ubuntu if you want by extension ignore they use upstart] it makes sense for the non technical consumer. in my corner of the world ubuntu is rolled out at one of the major banks [1 of 4] and they basically use firefox for everything maybe some libre office ... the same bank uses asterisk voip server. and for these systems its probably the way to go. same applys to daughters school 100% ubuntu. ubuntu is a firm favorite here and at one stage i was neighbours with M. Shuttleworths brother Grant other distros rarely feature. for use on a server or on embeded / systems its a bad call and i worry that it could cause problems that will be blamed on linux and not pid 0 for those who are not sure or would like to try something to see what will happen if systemd failed in any way type kill -9 0 as root. Greg -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
Em 10-02-2014 09:27, Gregory H. Nietsky escreveu: On 02/10/14 14:04, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: I thought it would be worth sharing what I have just read. Perhaps not everybody knows about it yet. 1. Debian votes for systemd https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00338.html as much as i think systemd is a stinking pile ... for debian [read ubuntu if you want by extension ignore they use upstart] it makes sense for the non technical consumer. in my corner of the world ubuntu is rolled out at one of the major banks [1 of 4] and they basically use firefox for everything maybe some libre office ... the same bank uses asterisk voip server. and for these systems its probably the way to go. same applys to daughters school 100% ubuntu. ubuntu is a firm favorite here and at one stage i was neighbours with M. Shuttleworths brother Grant other distros rarely feature. for use on a server or on embeded / systems its a bad call and i worry that it could cause problems that will be blamed on linux and not pid 0 for those who are not sure or would like to try something to see what will happen if systemd failed in any way type kill -9 0 as root. I am not a systemd user. Like what Bruce did as a great development step, extracting udev. Wish I could learn how to do it myself. Also, like that ĸen is keeping alive the eudev alternative. But I fear it might take over everything in other software (seems to have done it already in gnome), what would oblige everybody else to use it. That is what I do not like: oblige. Other than that I would, perhaps like systemd, if it could be only considered as an option. But I do like having bootscripts and still believe, since before Linux and Windows had been born, when I was a programmer, using MSDOS, I believe in do one thing, but do it well. Even Libreoffice seems to be done with that in mind. So, I try to follow the discussions here and, sometimes, have a look elsewhere, to find out at what point we are now. -- []s, Fernando -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
Em 10-02-2014 10:03, Fernando de Oliveira escreveu: I am not a systemd user. Like what Bruce did as a great development step, extracting udev. Wish I could learn how to do it myself. Also, like that ĸen is keeping alive the eudev alternative. I forgot to add: like what Armin is doing. Eventually, if we have more developers (I believe that we will have more developers, only a matter of time) or if we are obliged to use systemd..., we will have BLFS systemd. It is good, as a choice. Not so good if obliged, but... -- []s, Fernando -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
On 2014-02-10 13:04, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: I thought it would be worth sharing what I have just read. Perhaps not everybody knows about it yet. 1. Debian votes for systemd https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00338.html I just came across an interesting blog article today: Debian's discussion of whether to adopt systemd or not basically devolved into a false dichotomy between systemd and upstart. None of the things systemd does right are at all revolutionary. They've been done many times before. DJB's daemontools, runit, and Supervisor, among others, have solved the legacy init is broken problem over and over again (though each with some of their own flaws). Their failure to displace legacy sysvinit in major distributions had nothing to do with whether they solved the problem, and everything to do with marketing. Said differently, there's nothing great and revolutionary about systemd. Its popularity is purely the result of an aggressive, dictatorial marketing strategy including elements such as: * Engulfing other essential system components like udev and making them difficult or impossible to use without systemd. * Setting up for API lock-in (having the DBus interfaces provided by systemd become a necessary API that user-level programs depend on). * Dictating policy rather than being scoped such that the user, administrator, or systems integrator (distribution) has to provide glue. This eliminates bikesheds and thereby fast-tracks adoption at the expense of flexibility and diversity. More at http://ewontfix.com/14/ -- Igor Živković http://www.slashtime.net/ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
On 02/10/2014 02:50 PM, Igor Živković wrote: On 2014-02-10 13:04, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: I thought it would be worth sharing what I have just read. Perhaps not everybody knows about it yet. 1. Debian votes for systemd https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00338.html I just came across an interesting blog article today: Debian's discussion of whether to adopt systemd or not basically devolved into a false dichotomy between systemd and upstart. None of the things systemd does right are at all revolutionary. They've been done many times before. DJB's daemontools, runit, and Supervisor, among others, have solved the legacy init is broken problem over and over again (though each with some of their own flaws). Their failure to displace legacy sysvinit in major distributions had nothing to do with whether they solved the problem, and everything to do with marketing. Said differently, there's nothing great and revolutionary about systemd. Its popularity is purely the result of an aggressive, dictatorial marketing strategy including elements such as: Isn't the marketing the most important thing today? :P How would you expect someone to use/buy/know about something without good marketing strategy? * Engulfing other essential system components like udev and making them difficult or impossible to use without systemd. I rather think that udev isn't a big problem here. We have extracted udev from systemd tree and there's also eudev fork. The actual problem is logind, which can't be run without systemd since version 205+ due to change in cgroups handling, and that's rather a kernel requirement, not really enforced by systemd. The bigger problem than that is that there's no good replacement for logind at the moment. ConsoleKit is dead, insecure and doesn't have everything that people require nowadays. * Setting up for API lock-in (having the DBus interfaces provided by systemd become a necessary API that user-level programs depend on). Using D-Bus API's instead of C/C++ API's makes the code more portable. Several different projects can export same D-Bus API's and you can use them without the need to port over. Rare case, but it's possible (see notification daemon or policykit agent interfaces - same interfaces exported by several different packages). systemd also provides C API's so it's just systemd that really requires D-Bus now and will require kdbus later. * Dictating policy rather than being scoped such that the user, administrator, or systems integrator (distribution) has to provide glue. This eliminates bikesheds and thereby fast-tracks adoption at the expense of flexibility and diversity. You can override anything you don't like, really. Even the shipped unit files can be overriden by user ones if they don't suit the user and it's rather documented. It's a recent feature though. More at http://ewontfix.com/14/ -- Note: My last name is not Krejzi. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
On 02/10/2014 04:19 PM, Armin K. wrote: On 02/10/2014 01:27 PM, Gregory H. Nietsky wrote: On 02/10/14 14:04, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: I thought it would be worth sharing what I have just read. Perhaps not everybody knows about it yet. 1. Debian votes for systemd https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00338.html as much as i think systemd is a stinking pile ... for debian [read ubuntu if you want by extension ignore they use upstart] it makes sense for the non technical consumer. in my corner of the world ubuntu is rolled out at one of the major banks [1 of 4] and they basically use firefox for everything maybe some libre office ... the same bank uses asterisk voip server. and for these systems its probably the way to go. same applys to daughters school 100% ubuntu. ubuntu is a firm favorite here and at one stage i was neighbours with M. Shuttleworths brother Grant other distros rarely feature. for use on a server or on embeded / systems its a bad call and i worry that it could cause problems that will be blamed on linux and not pid 0 Actually, people rather prefer systemd for embedded since as you know embedded hardware isn't that much powerful as the server or desktop machines (any architecture). Systemd uses pure C code instead of shell scripts for most of the tasks, so it's a win in preformance and memory/cpu usage as well for them and it *really matters*. You can disable lots of things and optimize it for low-end hardware. I believe it was some car company that used systemd in their embedded software but I might be wrong. As for servers, I personally find it way easier to use and maintain servers that come with systemd unlike the ones that come with sysVinit/upstart/whatever. If you watched the video I posted few days ago, Lennart did mention that there's a learning curve and if you got used to sysvinit you *need* to learn systemd commands and such. Of course, those who spend years/decades using shell will say that shell is easy, blah blah, etc, but for beginners (- note: beginners, newbies, no knowledge or very limited one about shell) systemd is rather waaay easy to use and to understand. Learning curve is there, but if you are at the beginnings, it's rather way easier to learn systemd instead of shell. Of course, for some tasks you'll still need shell, but mostly there's software for common things that are being done on servers. Do note that not every server needs/requires some special treatment, but there are actually lot of them that do. If you think systemd is bad choice for servers, think again. Red Hat Enterprise Linux, who's more focused on servers than on desktops is shipping with systemd for RHEL 7.0 and they wouldn't do it if it was *that bad* as people say it is. openSUSE is also using it, so it shouldn't be surprising if SLES and SLED begin to use it, too. for those who are not sure or would like to try something to see what will happen if systemd failed in any way type kill -9 0 as root. Greg Really? Have you actually tried it for *any* init system? The PID 0 seems to be protected from sigkill and sigterm from userspace and you can't kill it that way. Any other non-standard way to terminate the process would cause kernel panic anyways, be it systemd, sysvinit, openrc, upstart, etc. It should read PID 1 instead of PID 0 in the original mail and response. My bad for not spotting it earlier, I just woke up when I wrote this response. The rest still stands. -- Note: My last name is not Krejzi. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:03:35AM -0300, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: . Also, like that ĸen is keeping alive the eudev alternative. Actually, all I'm doing is _using_ eudev - and I haven't moved on from eudev-1.2 yet (will be trying 1.4 in my forthcoming build). Don't want anyone to get the idea tht I'm actually doing anything for it :) This isn't the first time I've taken a different stance on a package. In particular, I remained with lilo on most of my machines in the grub-legacy days. In this case, Bruce's udev-from-systemd is fine, but I would rather stick with something more general in the hope it will develop a niche for itself. ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, dieses Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
Armin K. wrote: On 02/10/2014 04:19 PM, Armin K. wrote: If you watched the video I posted few days ago, Lennart did mention that there's a learning curve and if you got used to sysvinit you *need* to learn systemd commands and such. Of course, those who spend years/decades using shell will say that shell is easy, blah blah, etc, but for beginners (- note: beginners, newbies, no knowledge or very limited one about shell) systemd is rather waaay easy to use and to understand. Learning curve is there, but if you are at the beginnings, it's rather way easier to learn systemd instead of shell. Of course, for some tasks you'll still need shell, but mostly there's software for common things that are being done on servers. Do note that not every server needs/requires some special treatment, but there are actually lot of them that do. There are multiple levels of learning. For a user or even a junior administrator, systemd may be easier to use after the learning curve has been accomplished. What is not easier, in my opinion, it learning what the boot process is doing. What does sysV do beyond calling scripts? Very little. Most of the work is done in very short scripts. Any Linux admin has to learn scripting to be considered competent. Reading a startup script is basically trivial. Understanding what is happening during the boot process is fairly easy. On the other hand, really trying to really understand systemd requires delving into a lot of C code. That does not facilitate understanding. Remember that even good documentation easily gets out of sync with the code as maintenance changes are made. In addition, systemd is meant to support arbitrary systems where the hardware is quite variable and thousands of drivers and combinations of packages are installed. LFS is targeted at users who can customize their system to a degree much greater than any generalized distro. I guess I can summarize by saying that you don't want to use a fire hose if you only want a drink of water. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
Armin K. wrote: On 02/10/2014 02:50 PM, Igor Živković wrote: The actual problem is logind, which can't be run without systemd since version 205+ due to change in cgroups handling, and that's rather a kernel requirement, not really enforced by systemd. The bigger problem than that is that there's no good replacement for logind at the moment. ConsoleKit is dead, insecure and doesn't have everything that people require nowadays. * Setting up for API lock-in (having the DBus interfaces provided by systemd become a necessary API that user-level programs depend on). Using D-Bus API's instead of C/C++ API's makes the code more portable. Several different projects can export same D-Bus API's and you can use them without the need to port over. Rare case, but it's possible (see notification daemon or policykit agent interfaces - same interfaces exported by several different packages). systemd also provides C API's so it's just systemd that really requires D-Bus now and will require kdbus later. Why does systemd need D-Bus? Because they pulled in login? That's seems to be a circular argument to me. If you are creating a server with Apache, php, and mariadb or mysql, where the only access is via a web browser or ssh, why do you need D-Bus at all? As an example, anduin has been up 399 days and does not use D-Bus at all. Here is the entire list of unique running processes: anvil /bin/sh /usr/bin/mysqld_safe klogd pickup -l -t fifo -u qmgr -l -t fifo -u /sbin/agetty tty1 9600 /sbin/udevd --daemon smtpd syslogd /usr/bin/python /srv/mailman/bin/mailmanctl /usr/bin/python /srv/mailman/bin/qrunner /usr/bin/rsync --daemon /usr/lib/postfix/master /usr/lib/sa/sadc /usr/sbin/fcron /usr/sbin/httpd /usr/sbin/mysqld /usr/sbin/ntpd /usr/sbin/sshd /usr/sbin/vsftpd What advantages would systemd give? I can tell you the disadvantages: less control of what is running. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
On 02/10/2014 09:10 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: Why does systemd need D-Bus? Because they pulled in login? That's seems to be a circular argument to me. If you are creating a server with Apache, php, and mariadb or mysql, where the only access is via a web browser or ssh, why do you need D-Bus at all? Seems like an obsession with APIs to me. In systemd everything is an API as opposed to everything is a file in Unix. As an example, anduin has been up 399 days and does not use D-Bus at all. What advantages would systemd give? I can tell you the disadvantages: less control of what is running. Well, Lennart Poettering said something like cgroups are at the center of what a modern server needs to do. which is a horrid misunderstanding of what an init system really needs to do for servers. -- Igor Živković http://www.slashtime.net/ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
On 10.2.2014 21:10, Bruce Dubbs wrote: Armin K. wrote: On 02/10/2014 02:50 PM, Igor Živković wrote: The actual problem is logind, which can't be run without systemd since version 205+ due to change in cgroups handling, and that's rather a kernel requirement, not really enforced by systemd. The bigger problem than that is that there's no good replacement for logind at the moment. ConsoleKit is dead, insecure and doesn't have everything that people require nowadays. * Setting up for API lock-in (having the DBus interfaces provided by systemd become a necessary API that user-level programs depend on). Using D-Bus API's instead of C/C++ API's makes the code more portable. Several different projects can export same D-Bus API's and you can use them without the need to port over. Rare case, but it's possible (see notification daemon or policykit agent interfaces - same interfaces exported by several different packages). systemd also provides C API's so it's just systemd that really requires D-Bus now and will require kdbus later. Why does systemd need D-Bus? Because they pulled in login? That's seems to be a circular argument to me. If you are creating a server with Apache, php, and mariadb or mysql, where the only access is via a web browser or ssh, why do you need D-Bus at all? As an example, anduin has been up 399 days and does not use D-Bus at all. Here is the entire list of unique running processes: anvil /bin/sh /usr/bin/mysqld_safe klogd pickup -l -t fifo -u qmgr -l -t fifo -u /sbin/agetty tty1 9600 /sbin/udevd --daemon smtpd syslogd /usr/bin/python /srv/mailman/bin/mailmanctl /usr/bin/python /srv/mailman/bin/qrunner /usr/bin/rsync --daemon /usr/lib/postfix/master /usr/lib/sa/sadc /usr/sbin/fcron /usr/sbin/httpd /usr/sbin/mysqld /usr/sbin/ntpd /usr/sbin/sshd /usr/sbin/vsftpd What advantages would systemd give? I can tell you the disadvantages: less control of what is running. -- Bruce D-Bus is an IPC and such thing is needed to communicate between processes. systemd has lot of utilities and such that need to communicate with pid 1 (/sbin/init) and other components such as journald, logind, what not. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
The reply below is for linux users/administrators in general, not for LFS users/administrators. On 10.2.2014 20:49, Bruce Dubbs wrote: Armin K. wrote: On 02/10/2014 04:19 PM, Armin K. wrote: If you watched the video I posted few days ago, Lennart did mention that there's a learning curve and if you got used to sysvinit you *need* to learn systemd commands and such. Of course, those who spend years/decades using shell will say that shell is easy, blah blah, etc, but for beginners (- note: beginners, newbies, no knowledge or very limited one about shell) systemd is rather waaay easy to use and to understand. Learning curve is there, but if you are at the beginnings, it's rather way easier to learn systemd instead of shell. Of course, for some tasks you'll still need shell, but mostly there's software for common things that are being done on servers. Do note that not every server needs/requires some special treatment, but there are actually lot of them that do. There are multiple levels of learning. For a user or even a junior administrator, systemd may be easier to use after the learning curve has been accomplished. What is not easier, in my opinion, it learning what the boot process is doing. What does sysV do beyond calling scripts? Very little. Most of the work is done in very short scripts. Any Linux admin has to learn scripting to be considered competent. Reading a startup script is basically trivial. Understanding what is happening during the boot process is fairly easy. What systemd does is set up few builtin tasks, like basic stuff that's expected and required (more or less) to have on any linux os, then parse unit files which are in fairly understandable format and start the service as described in the unit file, in the order dependent on the scripts contents. Then it starts its other components, blah blah, and everything else. Not everyone wants to know about boot process. One does not need to be bothered with initial startup tasks which are mandatory for every single operating system unless he/she really wants that. On the other hand, really trying to really understand systemd requires delving into a lot of C code. That does not facilitate understanding. Remember that even good documentation easily gets out of sync with the code as maintenance changes are made. Even sysvinit has C code, so what? If you are speaking that way, you also need to learn the C code for Bash, Grep, Gawk, Coreutils (lots of them), etc to fully understand what's going on. As my message above says, not everyone wants to understand the most basic tasks that's used everywhere these days (mostly everywhere). In addition, systemd is meant to support arbitrary systems where the hardware is quite variable and thousands of drivers and combinations of packages are installed. LFS is targeted at users who can customize their system to a degree much greater than any generalized distro. I guess I can summarize by saying that you don't want to use a fire hose if you only want a drink of water. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
Armin K. wrote: The reply below is for linux users/administrators in general, not for LFS users/administrators. What systemd does is set up few builtin tasks, like basic stuff that's expected and required (more or less) to have on any linux os, then parse unit files which are in fairly understandable format and start the service as described in the unit file, in the order dependent on the scripts contents. Then it starts its other components, blah blah, and everything else. And if I want to do something my way can I disable the old way? Let's say I wanted to replace login or message handling with my program and I want to prevent systemd's version from running. Can I do that? As my message above says, not everyone wants to understand the most basic tasks that's used everywhere these days (mostly everywhere). I agree, but some do. And I think it's important to know for administrators and developers. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
Armin K. wrote: D-Bus is an IPC and such thing is needed to communicate between processes. Not the processes I use. systemd has lot of utilities and such that need to communicate with pid 1 (/sbin/init) and other components such as journald, logind, what not. So I need to add overhead to support systemd. I agree that systemd offers a lot of services to many people. It also demands that it be an all or nothing proposition. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
On 10.2.2014 22:37, Bruce Dubbs wrote: Armin K. wrote: D-Bus is an IPC and such thing is needed to communicate between processes. Not the processes I use. They don't care about small fish in the gigantic ocean. Their goal is to make something that it's acceptable for *everyone* but that doesn't mean that *everyone* will like it. systemd has lot of utilities and such that need to communicate with pid 1 (/sbin/init) and other components such as journald, logind, what not. So I need to add overhead to support systemd. I agree that systemd offers a lot of services to many people. It also demands that it be an all or nothing proposition. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
On 10.2.2014 22:31, Bruce Dubbs wrote: Armin K. wrote: The reply below is for linux users/administrators in general, not for LFS users/administrators. What systemd does is set up few builtin tasks, like basic stuff that's expected and required (more or less) to have on any linux os, then parse unit files which are in fairly understandable format and start the service as described in the unit file, in the order dependent on the scripts contents. Then it starts its other components, blah blah, and everything else. And if I want to do something my way can I disable the old way? Let's say I wanted to replace login or message handling with my program and I want to prevent systemd's version from running. Can I do that? Login, well probably YES if there was another one. If you meant logging, then also YES (for some values of YES). You can use custom logging daemon (sysklogd, rsyslog, etc) but systemd requires journald to be running. That doesn't however prevent you from using your own solution atop the deafult one if you feel the need. Same way you can use several desktops/wm's atop the XServer, but still the XServer needs to be running, no matter what (not really a good analogy, but I think you get the point). I don't know what message handling program you mean. If that's journald, then it's already answered. People seem to rather abuse freedom of choice since the developers can choose to do what they want with their software or to use anything they see fit for it. If you don't like it, write your own solution. As my message above says, not everyone wants to understand the most basic tasks that's used everywhere these days (mostly everywhere). I agree, but some do. And I think it's important to know for administrators and developers. I don't think that any admin, and especially developer (not a Distro developer though) needs to know at which point fsck is being run (although systemd will record that), or how and when exactly devtmpfs or proc were mounted. It's rather important that they *are* mounted or that fsck was run and the filesystem was without errors to most (if not all) administrators. I doubt that non-distro developers even care for anything in the boot process except when their login prompt appears (be it GUI or tty one) and if the filesystem is healthy (or if their service was started that they need). -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
On Mon, 10 Feb 2014 09:04:24 -0300 Fernando de Oliveira fam...@yahoo.com.br wrote: I thought it would be worth sharing what I have just read. Perhaps not everybody knows about it yet. 2. NVIDIA contributes to open-source drivers(nouveau) http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2014-January/053028.html 'Bout fucking time. Now cue asskissers (Ars Technica, Wired and many, many others) praising Nvidia for engaging with the community et cetera while at the same time forgetting to mention that Nouveau *first* became fully functional and only then did Nvidia bother to lift a finger. -- Svi moji e-mailovi su kriptografski potpisani. Proverite ih. All of my e-mails are cryptographically signed. Verify them. -- You don't need an AI for a robot uprising. Humans will do just fine. signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
Armin K. wrote: On 10.2.2014 22:37, Bruce Dubbs wrote: Armin K. wrote: D-Bus is an IPC and such thing is needed to communicate between processes. Not the processes I use. They don't care about small fish in the gigantic ocean. Their goal is to make something that it's acceptable for *everyone* but that doesn't mean that *everyone* will like it. That's why we have LFS. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] News about nouveau and systemd
On Mon, 10 Feb 2014 17:31:07 +0100 Armin K. kre...@email.com wrote: Isn't the marketing the most important thing today? :P How would you expect someone to use/buy/know about something without good marketing strategy? You are right. Very little sense in software engineering, just modern political technologies. Modern dirty politics, nothing personal. Less than in a two years we have a vendor lock-in in a key area. My congratulations. -- - ptr -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
