Re: Continuing to use SysV; LTS [Re: Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?]
Andrei POPESCU writes: > > Of course, this will not fare well with people that chose GNU/Linux > because of the wrong impression that it is without cost. > > [1] possibly even more so than other distributions, provided the desired > changes don't go against the Social Contract, etc. > > Kind regards, > Andrei Thank you Andrei, that was exactly my point. Mart -- "We will need a longer wall when the revolution comes." --- AJS, quoting an uncertain source. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/86oaqjides@gaheris.avalon.lan
Re: Continuing to use SysV; LTS [Re: Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?]
On 12/31/2014 1:34 PM, Mike McGinn wrote: > > > On Wednesday, December 31, 2014 09:45:53 Jerry Stuckle wrote: > >> On 12/31/2014 4:20 AM, Mart van de Wege wrote: > >> > Jerry Stuckle writes: > >> >> On 12/30/2014 5:49 PM, Don Armstrong wrote: > >> >>> On Tue, 30 Dec 2014, Jerry Stuckle wrote: > >> The people there have enough to do at work, and like to have a life > >> outside of work. Believer it or not, not everyone is capable (or > >> interested) in spending their life working on Linux. > >> >>> > >> >>> If Debian is important to their business, then they should hire people > >> >>> to work on the bits of Debian that matter to them. Pretty much > everyone > >> >>> who is serious about using Debian in production does this. > >> >> > >> >> That's a great idea. Who's going to pay these people - you? > >> > > >> > Simply mirroring the question is not an answer. > >> > > >> > Don is right; what have you done for Debian that they should be obliged > >> > to maintain the distro in ways you want? > >> > > >> > If you want something, the answer is always the same in Free Software: > >> > either do the work yourself or pay for it. No-one is obliged to do > >> > things to your liking without some consideration coming from your end. > >> > > >> > Mart > >> > >> Mart, > >> > >> I've never said anyone should be obliged to maintain Debian the way I > >> want. I said the way they are going is not acceptable, so my clients > >> are changing distributions. Period. > >> > >> It's you and others who have demanded people spend money they don't have. > >> > >> If you want them to help Debian, then are you going to pay for it to > >> happen? If not, who (besides my clients) is going to pay? > >> > >> When you can answer that, I can answer your question. > >> > >> Jerry > > > > This is the problem with Linux, folks use it to make money and feel no > obligation to contribute to it. Even if they do not contribute > development time, they could budget an annual donation to the Linux > Foundation, Debian or whatever distribution they use. > > > > Linux developers eat too. They would be paying a license fee if they > were using MS or a commercial Unix. > > > > Just my thoughts. > > > > Mike > > > > -- > > Mike McGinn KD2CNU > > Be happy that brainfarts don't smell. > > No electrons were harmed in sending this message, some were inconvenienced. > > ** Registered Linux User 377849 > > > Mike, they know Linux developers need to eat, also. My clients use Linux for a number of reasons, including stability, small footprint and ability to load a bare-bones system (i.e. no GUI, no unwanted background processes, etc.). At the same time, they have a budget they must stay within, and there is no money in that budget to hire programmers other than for their unique needs. They don't set the budget - that comes from higher up in the corporation. And those people have to set budgets based on expected corporate income. Now I don't know if they donate to the Linux Foundation or not - and it's none of my business. All I know is when they need new work done, it's pretty much always a negotiation between what I want for the work and what they are able to pay. And even if they had hired people to work on Debian, it would have made no difference. The TC made their decision, and would not have asked my clients for input. So the change would have to be made, anyway. Jerry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54a45260.90...@gmail.com
Re: Continuing to use SysV; LTS [Re: Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?]
On 12/31/2014 1:10 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > On Mi, 31 dec 14, 09:45:53, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >> >> I've never said anyone should be obliged to maintain Debian the way I >> want. I said the way they are going is not acceptable, so my clients >> are changing distributions. Period. > > I think the point some are trying to make is that Debian's direction can > be influenced[1], but this requires involvement. It might also be > cheaper in the long term than distro-hopping every time the distribution > in use takes an unwanted turn. > > Of course, this will not fare well with people that chose GNU/Linux > because of the wrong impression that it is without cost. > > [1] possibly even more so than other distributions, provided the desired > changes don't go against the Social Contract, etc. > > Kind regards, > Andrei > Andrei, as I've said - these companies don't have the time or money to contribute to Debian. Not that it would have made any difference - the TC did not consult them when making their decision, and would not have consulted them even if my clients had been contributing. Andrei, I follow your advice here and appreciate it a lot. I've learned a lot from you. And you can contribute all you want. But don't expect everyone else to have the skills or means to do so. Jerry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54a44ff0.70...@gmail.com
Re: Continuing to use SysV; LTS [Re: Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 1/01/2015 5:10 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > On Mi, 31 dec 14, 09:45:53, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >> >> I've never said anyone should be obliged to maintain Debian the >> way I want. I said the way they are going is not acceptable, so >> my clients are changing distributions. Period. > > I think the point some are trying to make is that Debian's > direction can be influenced[1], but this requires involvement. It > might also be cheaper in the long term than distro-hopping every > time the distribution in use takes an unwanted turn. > > Of course, this will not fare well with people that chose GNU/Linux > because of the wrong impression that it is without cost. > > [1] possibly even more so than other distributions, provided the > desired changes don't go against the Social Contract, etc. Unfortunately for me, the direction of Linux is a problem, I see no future in continuing with Linux when it is possible to get the /right/ result for myself and my clients by moving away from Linux to, most likely, a BSD flavour [FreeBSD is the most likely at this stage]. The writing is on the wall for Linux as far as I am concerned. It's not just Debian, even though Debian [in my world view at least] has been a major driving force in the Linux world -- going with systemd now and all that will follow due to this decision, it's not rosy, not rosy at all. Spending monies or time trying to change the situation will only delay the inevitable and such monies and time would be wasted in my view. A. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) iF4EAREIAAYFAlSkSboACgkQqBZry7fv4vuiSgEAvMP5PTHdchdEmkIOE/9VeQy2 QWHjC7PjDk2rT6mm6FsA/jhL50I9gSV+90y6JdCSieaqeaaV1JmjvEcE3oeICAbn =V9DB -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54a449bc.4070...@affinityvision.com.au
Re: Continuing to use SysV; LTS [Re: Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?]
On 31 December 2014 18:10:00 GMT+00:00, Andrei POPESCU wrote: >On Mi, 31 dec 14, 09:45:53, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >> >> I've never said anyone should be obliged to maintain Debian the way I >> want. I said the way they are going is not acceptable, so my clients >> are changing distributions. Period. > >I think the point some are trying to make is that Debian's direction >can >be influenced[1], but this requires involvement. It might also be >cheaper in the long term than distro-hopping every time the >distribution >in use takes an unwanted turn. > >Of course, this will not fare well with people that chose GNU/Linux >because of the wrong impression that it is without cost. > >[1] possibly even more so than other distributions, provided the >desired >changes don't go against the Social Contract, etc. > >Kind regards, >Andrei >-- >http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser >Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: >http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic >http://nuvreauspam.ro/gpg-transition.txt This is very interesting, I've always viewed Linux as 'the peoples' choice for an OS but watching these responses has made me think/realise that it's not really. Its development is driven by the biggest financial contributors - which will always be the corps. Due to it's open nature it is perhaps more susceptible to abuse/conflict in this area too. I guess I've been a little naive to that till this whole sysd thing. -- Simon
Re: Continuing to use SysV; LTS [Re: Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?]
On Wednesday, December 31, 2014 09:45:53 Jerry Stuckle wrote: > On 12/31/2014 4:20 AM, Mart van de Wege wrote: > > Jerry Stuckle writes: > >> On 12/30/2014 5:49 PM, Don Armstrong wrote: > >>> On Tue, 30 Dec 2014, Jerry Stuckle wrote: > The people there have enough to do at work, and like to have a life > outside of work. Believer it or not, not everyone is capable (or > interested) in spending their life working on Linux. > >>> > >>> If Debian is important to their business, then they should hire people > >>> to work on the bits of Debian that matter to them. Pretty much everyone > >>> who is serious about using Debian in production does this. > >> > >> That's a great idea. Who's going to pay these people - you? > > > > Simply mirroring the question is not an answer. > > > > Don is right; what have you done for Debian that they should be obliged > > to maintain the distro in ways you want? > > > > If you want something, the answer is always the same in Free Software: > > either do the work yourself or pay for it. No-one is obliged to do > > things to your liking without some consideration coming from your end. > > > > Mart > > Mart, > > I've never said anyone should be obliged to maintain Debian the way I > want. I said the way they are going is not acceptable, so my clients > are changing distributions. Period. > > It's you and others who have demanded people spend money they don't have. > > If you want them to help Debian, then are you going to pay for it to > happen? If not, who (besides my clients) is going to pay? > > When you can answer that, I can answer your question. > > Jerry This is the problem with Linux, folks use it to make money and feel no obligation to contribute to it. Even if they do not contribute development time, they could budget an annual donation to the Linux Foundation, Debian or whatever distribution they use. Linux developers eat too. They would be paying a license fee if they were using MS or a commercial Unix. Just my thoughts. Mike -- Mike McGinn KD2CNU Be happy that brainfarts don't smell. No electrons were harmed in sending this message, some were inconvenienced. ** Registered Linux User 377849
Re: Continuing to use SysV; LTS [Re: Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?]
On Mi, 31 dec 14, 09:45:53, Jerry Stuckle wrote: > > I've never said anyone should be obliged to maintain Debian the way I > want. I said the way they are going is not acceptable, so my clients > are changing distributions. Period. I think the point some are trying to make is that Debian's direction can be influenced[1], but this requires involvement. It might also be cheaper in the long term than distro-hopping every time the distribution in use takes an unwanted turn. Of course, this will not fare well with people that chose GNU/Linux because of the wrong impression that it is without cost. [1] possibly even more so than other distributions, provided the desired changes don't go against the Social Contract, etc. Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic http://nuvreauspam.ro/gpg-transition.txt signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Continuing to use SysV; LTS [Re: Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?]
On 12/31/2014 4:20 AM, Mart van de Wege wrote: > Jerry Stuckle writes: > >> On 12/30/2014 5:49 PM, Don Armstrong wrote: >>> On Tue, 30 Dec 2014, Jerry Stuckle wrote: The people there have enough to do at work, and like to have a life outside of work. Believer it or not, not everyone is capable (or interested) in spending their life working on Linux. >>> >>> If Debian is important to their business, then they should hire people >>> to work on the bits of Debian that matter to them. Pretty much everyone >>> who is serious about using Debian in production does this. >>> >> >> That's a great idea. Who's going to pay these people - you? >> > Simply mirroring the question is not an answer. > > Don is right; what have you done for Debian that they should be obliged > to maintain the distro in ways you want? > > If you want something, the answer is always the same in Free Software: > either do the work yourself or pay for it. No-one is obliged to do > things to your liking without some consideration coming from your end. > > Mart > Mart, I've never said anyone should be obliged to maintain Debian the way I want. I said the way they are going is not acceptable, so my clients are changing distributions. Period. It's you and others who have demanded people spend money they don't have. If you want them to help Debian, then are you going to pay for it to happen? If not, who (besides my clients) is going to pay? When you can answer that, I can answer your question. Jerry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54a40c21.7020...@gmail.com
Re: Continuing to use SysV; LTS [Re: Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?]
Jerry Stuckle writes: > On 12/30/2014 5:49 PM, Don Armstrong wrote: >> On Tue, 30 Dec 2014, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >>> The people there have enough to do at work, and like to have a life >>> outside of work. Believer it or not, not everyone is capable (or >>> interested) in spending their life working on Linux. >> >> If Debian is important to their business, then they should hire people >> to work on the bits of Debian that matter to them. Pretty much everyone >> who is serious about using Debian in production does this. >> > > That's a great idea. Who's going to pay these people - you? > Simply mirroring the question is not an answer. Don is right; what have you done for Debian that they should be obliged to maintain the distro in ways you want? If you want something, the answer is always the same in Free Software: either do the work yourself or pay for it. No-one is obliged to do things to your liking without some consideration coming from your end. Mart -- "We will need a longer wall when the revolution comes." --- AJS, quoting an uncertain source. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/861tngjhvi@gaheris.avalon.lan
Re: Fwd: Re: Continuing to use SysV; LTS [Re: Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?]
On 12/30/2014 10:07 PM, William Unruh wrote: >> >> On 12/30/2014 5:49 PM, Don Armstrong wrote: >>> On Tue, 30 Dec 2014, Jerry Stuckle wrote: The people there have enough to do at work, and like to have a life outside of work. Believer it or not, not everyone is capable (or interested) in spending their life working on Linux. >>> >>> If Debian is important to their business, then they should hire people >>> to work on the bits of Debian that matter to them. Pretty much everyone >>> who is serious about using Debian in production does this. >>> >> >> That's a great idea. Who's going to pay these people - you? > > They apparently pay you. > Who pays the hardware people who design the boards/etc? > Yes, they pay me because the device drivers are custom (and proprietary). Nothing exists in public or other private hands. And they have EE's who design the electronics. But that is a different division. You seem to think money is unending. It isn't, believe me. They have budgets, and must stay within them. There is no money available to hire consultants to maintain a distro. Of course, there's another option (and only one other one). The company could go out of business. Then the problem would go away. >> >> My clients are not IT folks. They don't need Debian per say - they DO >> need Linux. And, like all companies, they have a limited budget for >> software implementations. > > Fair enough, but then if it is critical to their business, they will > have to pay. > You don't get it, do you. THERE IS NO MONEY TO PAY! > ... >> >> Again - these companies are not NOT IT companies. They are >> manufacturers of equipment. Right now, Debian just happens to be the > > But now adays, software it the largest part of an equipment business. To > say they do not have software people is to say they do not have a > business. > Maybe YOUR businesses. Not all, by any means. And in these companies, software is only a very SMALL part of their business. Even the electronics is a small part of the business. The money is in the equipment being controlled. >> distribution they are using. Yes, they have a couple of people familiar >> with Linux administration, but that's about it. And these administering >> Linux is only a very small part of their job. That's why they hire >> people like me to write specific device drivers and other software. But >> they are not going to spend money hiring consultants to work on the OS. > > But they need to adapt the software for their use. > That is a critical part of their business. In fact it is the part that > sets them apart from all their competitors. Hardware is easy these days. > Electronic hardware is easy. But that isn't these company's business. That what you guys don't understand. Consider an automobile. It has a computer to control the car. But that computer is maybe a $500 part in a $35K machine. Sure, new cars NEED that computer. But it is one of the least important parts of the car. The engine, body, interior, handling and a couple of dozen other things are much more important to the buyer. And that's where the money goes. The computer is the minimum necessary to do the job. Although my clients are not automobile manufacturers, the comparison applies. >> >> They could use pretty much any distro. They liked Debian because of its >> stability. But they don't NEED Debian. If they wanted to spend lots of >> time trying to maintain the OS, they would have gone to slackware. > > Whether Debian is the best choice for them is of course something they > will have to decide. It is modular, stable, conservative, old > fashioned,... > > ??? > > And its continued stability is seriously being questions. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54a372f9.4060...@gmail.com
Fwd: Re: Continuing to use SysV; LTS [Re: Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?]
> >On 12/30/2014 5:49 PM, Don Armstrong wrote: >> On Tue, 30 Dec 2014, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >>> The people there have enough to do at work, and like to have a life >>> outside of work. Believer it or not, not everyone is capable (or >>> interested) in spending their life working on Linux. >> >> If Debian is important to their business, then they should hire people >> to work on the bits of Debian that matter to them. Pretty much everyone >> who is serious about using Debian in production does this. >> > >That's a great idea. Who's going to pay these people - you? They apparently pay you. Who pays the hardware people who design the boards/etc? > >My clients are not IT folks. They don't need Debian per say - they DO >need Linux. And, like all companies, they have a limited budget for >software implementations. Fair enough, but then if it is critical to their business, they will have to pay. ... > >Again - these companies are not NOT IT companies. They are >manufacturers of equipment. Right now, Debian just happens to be the But now adays, software it the largest part of an equipment business. To say they do not have software people is to say they do not have a business. >distribution they are using. Yes, they have a couple of people familiar >with Linux administration, but that's about it. And these administering >Linux is only a very small part of their job. That's why they hire >people like me to write specific device drivers and other software. But >they are not going to spend money hiring consultants to work on the OS. But they need to adapt the software for their use. That is a critical part of their business. In fact it is the part that sets them apart from all their competitors. Hardware is easy these days. > >They could use pretty much any distro. They liked Debian because of its >stability. But they don't NEED Debian. If they wanted to spend lots of >time trying to maintain the OS, they would have gone to slackware. Whether Debian is the best choice for them is of course something they will have to decide. It is modular, stable, conservative, old fashioned,... ??? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141231030747.c153710f...@wormhole.physics.ubc.ca
Re: Continuing to use SysV; LTS [Re: Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?]
On 12/30/2014 5:49 PM, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Tue, 30 Dec 2014, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >> The people there have enough to do at work, and like to have a life >> outside of work. Believer it or not, not everyone is capable (or >> interested) in spending their life working on Linux. > > If Debian is important to their business, then they should hire people > to work on the bits of Debian that matter to them. Pretty much everyone > who is serious about using Debian in production does this. > That's a great idea. Who's going to pay these people - you? My clients are not IT folks. They don't need Debian per say - they DO need Linux. And, like all companies, they have a limited budget for software implementations. > If they (or anyone else) is interested in doing this, there are numerous > people who could be hired straight off of the consultants list. If they > (or anyone else) is having a hard time finding contributors to fund, > contact lea...@debian.org. > And you're going to pay those consultants, right? >> And they are concerned enough with the way Debian is moving to make >> the investment in switching. Better to do it now, when they have time, >> than later when they find out they have to switch quickly. > > If they have already decided to switch, then they should start > contributing to whatever distribution they're going to switch to. > And you're going to pay for these consultants? Again - these companies are not NOT IT companies. They are manufacturers of equipment. Right now, Debian just happens to be the distribution they are using. Yes, they have a couple of people familiar with Linux administration, but that's about it. And these administering Linux is only a very small part of their job. That's why they hire people like me to write specific device drivers and other software. But they are not going to spend money hiring consultants to work on the OS. They could use pretty much any distro. They liked Debian because of its stability. But they don't NEED Debian. If they wanted to spend lots of time trying to maintain the OS, they would have gone to slackware. Jerry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54a357df.6030...@gmail.com
Re: Continuing to use SysV; LTS [Re: Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?]
On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Tue, 30 Dec 2014, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >> The people there have enough to do at work, and like to have a life >> outside of work. Believer it or not, not everyone is capable (or >> interested) in spending their life working on Linux. > > If Debian is important to their business, then they should hire people > to work on the bits of Debian that matter to them. I have to admit, this is a thought that has been on my mind lately. > Pretty much everyone > who is serious about using Debian in production does this. Unfortunately, I don't think that's exactly true, for some defintions of "serious". Lots of companies think they are serious about using Linux, but not feeding their profits back upstream. On the contrary, they tend to be trying to use the (imaginary, but much touted) cost differential as a competitive wedge, pushing down their profits and squeezing the market. Killing the goose that laid the golden egg. Not facing up to the freedom vs. zero (initial) cost dillemma. Not really serious even though they are seriously thinking they are serious. (Yeah, I'm sort of looking at myself in the mirror, as an individual. I don't contribute as much as I should because it has been too easy to get distracted, playing with all the zero initial cost stuff.) > If they (or anyone else) is interested in doing this, there are numerous > people who could be hired straight off of the consultants list. If they > (or anyone else) is having a hard time finding contributors to fund, > contact lea...@debian.org. > >> And they are concerned enough with the way Debian is moving to make >> the investment in switching. Better to do it now, when they have time, >> than later when they find out they have to switch quickly. > > If they have already decided to switch, then they should start > contributing to whatever distribution they're going to switch to. And I'm thinking that, if more of the people who think they are serious about FOSS had been taking the duties of freedom more seriously, the systemd debacle might have been avoided. (By making more work generalizing the several init approaches publically available, and by making the inits more interchangeable, more manageable by people who don't have time to learn shell scripting -- although managers scared of learning programming languages is yet another manifestation of the problem.) I'm moving to openbsd partly to make sure I start contributing. (Also because I see too many devs in the debian community who either don't want to learn programming or whose ideas about programming are diametrically opposed to what I think is my experience.) -- Joel Rees Be careful when you look at conspiracy. Look first in your own heart, and ask yourself if you are not your own worst enemy. Arm yourself with knowledge of yourself, as well. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAAr43iP0EDsyHXVN2LGKQvbW+wv7Gjw_DtzkD8MU0O=4vb3...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Continuing to use SysV; LTS [Re: Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?]
On Tue, 30 Dec 2014, Jerry Stuckle wrote: > The people there have enough to do at work, and like to have a life > outside of work. Believer it or not, not everyone is capable (or > interested) in spending their life working on Linux. If Debian is important to their business, then they should hire people to work on the bits of Debian that matter to them. Pretty much everyone who is serious about using Debian in production does this. If they (or anyone else) is interested in doing this, there are numerous people who could be hired straight off of the consultants list. If they (or anyone else) is having a hard time finding contributors to fund, contact lea...@debian.org. > And they are concerned enough with the way Debian is moving to make > the investment in switching. Better to do it now, when they have time, > than later when they find out they have to switch quickly. If they have already decided to switch, then they should start contributing to whatever distribution they're going to switch to. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com unbeingdead isn't beingalive -- e.e. cummings "31" _73 Poems_ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141230224936.gb29...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: Continuing to use SysV; LTS [Re: Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?]
On 12/30/2014 9:45 AM, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Mon, 29 Dec 2014, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >> I should also add - that's why they are looking at other distros now. >> They are planning to stay on Wheezy as long as possible. It will >> probably take two years for them to get another distro ready for >> production. > > If switching to systemd is their main concern, then they can just stay > with SysV for jessie. They should probably also consider contributing > developer time (or your time) to the continued support of SysV in > jessie+1 (and beyond.) > > If they want to stick with wheezy for other reasons, they should help > make squeeze LTS a success so people are more likely to also contribute > to wheezy LTS when it is inevitably EOLed by the stable security team. > > If it's something else that bothers them, the way to influence Debian is > to do the work. > Don, that's a good, but impractical idea. The people there have enough to do at work, and like to have a life outside of work. Believer it or not, not everyone is capable (or interested) in spending their life working on Linux. And they are concerned enough with the way Debian is moving to make the investment in switching. Better to do it now, when they have time, than later when they find out they have to switch quickly. Jerry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54a30351.4040...@gmail.com
Re: Continuing to use SysV; LTS [Re: Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?]
On 12/30/2014 at 09:45 AM, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Mon, 29 Dec 2014, Jerry Stuckle wrote: > >> I should also add - that's why they are looking at other distros >> now. They are planning to stay on Wheezy as long as possible. It >> will probably take two years for them to get another distro ready >> for production. > > If switching to systemd is their main concern, then they can just > stay with SysV for jessie. They should probably also consider > contributing developer time (or your time) to the continued support > of SysV in jessie+1 (and beyond.) Take care about what configuration to use in sticking with sysvinit in jessie, though. I run two main Debian systems; on one of them I've installed sysvinit-core+systemd-shim and removed systemd-the-package (and all reverse dependencies, of course), and on the other I've installed sysvinit-core+systemd-shim and left libpam-systemd (and all dependencies) in place - and I have seen behavior changes in at least the latter case. (I think I've seen some changes in both cases, but I've changed the installed-package configuration on the former machine since then, so I can't swear those changes are still present.) Just yesterday, I rebooted the computer with libpam-systemd present (and thus systemd-logind active) for the first time since the switch, and I've already noted two particular behavior changes which I find bothersome: * When I launch X from tty1 with 'startx', it now appears to run on tty1 itself instead of on the more traditional tty7 - which has the practical effect that it's no longer possible to kill X by shifting to tty1 and hitting Ctrl-C, which is an emergency break-out measure I've found necessary or at least convenient in the past. There are probably ways to reconfigure things to prevent this behavior change (I think I've seen such mentioned here on-list in the past), but that is the behavior which seems to result from the default configuration. * When I boot to the text console to log in, there are messages from logind printed prior to login which clutter the console (and step all over the actual login prompt), and more printed after hitting Enter on the password prompt to actually log in. If there are ways to prevent this behavior change without muting potentially-desirable (new) logging activity entirely, I'm not aware of them. -- The Wanderer The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Continuing to use SysV; LTS [Re: Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?]
On Mon, 29 Dec 2014, Jerry Stuckle wrote: > I should also add - that's why they are looking at other distros now. > They are planning to stay on Wheezy as long as possible. It will > probably take two years for them to get another distro ready for > production. If switching to systemd is their main concern, then they can just stay with SysV for jessie. They should probably also consider contributing developer time (or your time) to the continued support of SysV in jessie+1 (and beyond.) If they want to stick with wheezy for other reasons, they should help make squeeze LTS a success so people are more likely to also contribute to wheezy LTS when it is inevitably EOLed by the stable security team. If it's something else that bothers them, the way to influence Debian is to do the work. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com Cheop's Law: Nothing ever gets built on schedule or within budget. -- Robert Heinlein _Time Enough For Love_ p242 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141230144546.gb11...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
