Re: Replace systemd

[Reco]

> > >> Too many critical bugs found in them and treated by the upstream
> > >> developpers with only contempt for the people reporting them
> > >> (see
> > >> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/6237#issuecomment-312458445)
> > > 
> > > By that logic (in)famous libc bug 4980 shoud've stopped by from
> > > using
> > > any sane Linux distribution 10 years ago. Did it?
> > >
> > Most important is not the presence of bugs. It is the way people in
> > charge deal with them.
> 
> My point exactly. #4980 is the reason they call Ulrich Drepper 'Stop
> Reopening'. But also, #4980 was fixed.
> Just the same as #6237 will be fixed in a sane way. At least that's the
> fine folks on oss-security are promising right now.

I believe archives should contain this.

Systemd bug 6237 aka CVE-2017-182 was fixed on Jul 6 2017 by
upstream commit bb28e68477a3a39796e4999a6cbc6ac6345a9159 in a sane way.
Just as predicted.

This change was included in recently released systemd v234.

Reco

Re: Replace systemd

[Thomas Schmitt]

Hi,

Rob van der Putten wrote:
> You need to modify your net install DVD too;
> http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/How_to_remove_systemd_from_the_Netinst_CD

Guests may not discuss there. So here:

The genisoimage run in "update-cdrom.sh" only prepares for booting via
BIOS from CD/DVD. One would need to afterwards run
  isohybrid /div/test.iso
in order to make it ready for booting via BIOS from USB stick.

The promised UEFI capabilities by a run of
  isohybrid --uefi test.iso
cannot be achieved because the genisoimage run did not advertise file
/boot/grub/efi.img as El Torito boot image for EFI.
Upstream genisoimage cannot do this. Fedora has a modified one which knows
option -e. See
  http://www.syslinux.org/wiki/index.php?title=Isohybrid#UEFI

In debian-9.0.0-amd64-netinst.iso the file /.disk/mkisofs tells the
command that was used to create it. Cleaned from the Jigdo specific options,
peculiarities of the production machine, and some ineffective options,
that is:

  xorriso -as mkisofs \
-r \
-V 'Debian 9.0.0 amd64 n' \
-o test.iso \
-J -joliet-long \
-isohybrid-mbr "$isohybrid_MBR" \
-c isolinux/boot.cat \
-b isolinux/isolinux.bin \
  -boot-load-size 4 -boot-info-table -no-emul-boot \
-eltorito-alt-boot \
-e boot/grub/efi.img \
  -no-emul-boot -isohybrid-gpt-basdat \
./

where $isohybrid_MBR is a file with a copy of the first 432 bytes of the
original ISO. E.g made by:

  isohybrid_MBR=/tmp/debian9.mbr
  dd if=debian-9.0.0-amd64-netinst.iso bs=1 count=432 of="$isohybrid_MBR"

A run of isohybrid is not needed. The ISO will begin to boot from the
usual media on the usual firmwares. How far it gets depends on the
quality of the other manipulations, which i am not up to judge.


Have a nice day :)

Thomas

Re: Replace systemd

[Rob van der Putten]

Hi there


On 05/07/17 17:27, Don Armstrong wrote:


It already exists:

https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/04/msg00097.html

«
You can just append:

preseed/late_command="in-target apt-get install -y sysvinit-core"

to the installer command line.

Or you can roll your own install media with its own syslinux.cfg which
adds that or something more complicated in a preseed file.

You don't need to fork the installer, or submit any patches upstream.

If you want something more complicated, like not installing systemd at
all, you'll have to pass --include and --exclude options to debootstrap
using the base-installer/includes and base-installer/excludes preseed
options; something like:

base-installer/includes=sysvinit-core base-installer/excludes=systemd-sysv

but that's totally untested.
»


You need to modify your net install DVD too;
http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/How_to_remove_systemd_from_the_Netinst_CD


Regards,
Rob

Re: Replace systemd

[Patrick Bartek]

On Fri, 7 Jul 2017 20:01:15 +0100 Brian  wrote:

> On Fri 07 Jul 2017 at 08:50:37 -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 7 Jul 2017 14:53:09 +0100 Jonathan Dowland 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 03:31:18PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > > >I would be interested if there were.  I've never seen such an
> > > >option
> > > ...
> > > >Let the list know what you discover.
> > > 
> > > I'm surprised to report that the option do manually select
> > > software is no longer there. As I recall, it was essentially
> > > invoking aptitude within d-i, either after or instead of the
> > > normal task selection stage. I've just gone through an expert
> > > mode install with stretch netinst and that option is no longer
> > > available.
> > 
> > The consequences of "progress."
> 
> How does progress proceed from something which never existed?

Happens all the time, but I was being sarcastic.  And "progress" is in
quotes, meaning it's not really that.

B

Re: Replace systemd

[David Wright]

On Fri 07 Jul 2017 at 14:53:09 (+0100), Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 03:31:18PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> >I would be interested if there were.  I've never seen such an option
> ...
> >Let the list know what you discover.
> 
> I'm surprised to report that the option do manually select software is
> no longer there. As I recall, it was essentially invoking aptitude
> within d-i, either after or instead of the normal task selection stage.
> I've just gone through an expert mode install with stretch netinst and
> that option is no longer available.

I think you'll find that it was in fact dselect. Up to and including
sarge, you were dumped into dselect with a selection of packages
already made, taking into account which sources you had selected.

However, this doesn't affect the intent of this thread. By the time
you got to this installation step, the base system was already
installed and you had rebooted (the "smoke test", remember?), so
the init system was already up and running.

Cheers,
David.

Re: Replace systemd

[Brian]

On Fri 07 Jul 2017 at 08:50:37 -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:

> On Fri, 7 Jul 2017 14:53:09 +0100 Jonathan Dowland 
> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 03:31:18PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > >I would be interested if there were.  I've never seen such an option
> > ...
> > >Let the list know what you discover.
> > 
> > I'm surprised to report that the option do manually select software is
> > no longer there. As I recall, it was essentially invoking aptitude
> > within d-i, either after or instead of the normal task selection
> > stage. I've just gone through an expert mode install with stretch
> > netinst and that option is no longer available.
> 
> The consequences of "progress."

How does progress proceed from something which never existed?

-- 
Brian. 

Re: Re: Replace systemd

[Brian]

On Thu 06 Jul 2017 at 21:07:44 -0600, Tom Dial wrote:

> I am not a particular fan of systemd, but have learned to live with it,
> on the basis that deviations from the default install are likely to lead
> to more work, possibly exponentially, down the line.
> 
> That said, the hplip in Devuan 2.0 seems to be identical to that in
> Stretch, and neither, therefore would depend on (or recommend) systemd.
> 
> The output of "dpkg --status hplip" is identical on the two systems.

Technical point. One word: consolekit. Clearer now?

-- 
Brian.

Re: Replace systemd

[Brian]

On Thu 06 Jul 2017 at 15:49:41 +0200, Erwan David wrote:

> There are also packages which add a dependency on systemd whereas the
> same software works perfectly on FreeBSD, thus without anything
> ressembling it (eg hplip).

hplip does not have systemd as a Depends:,

In about 2009 hplip introduced support for policykit. Utilities such as
hp-setup could be run as an ordinary user rather than as the superuser.
Therefore, Debian's hplip depends on policykit. Sensible, you would have
to agree.

But, nearly 10 years later, policykit-1 depends on libpam-systemd, which,
in turn, depends on systemd. No real problem there; an installation of
policykit-1 by hplip does not change PID 1.

For an hplip installation not to lead to the installation of systemd the
target to aim at is libpam-systemd. Good luck with that, but don't blame
hplip; it is only providing a secure environment for users to operate in.

> This leads to upgrade from a jessie without systemd will install it.

A Jessie hplip pulls in systemd so your point is obscure. Perhaps you
could analyse in detail what FreeBSD does with hplip to clarify how it
differs.

-- 
Brian.

Re: Replace systemd

[Patrick Bartek]

On Fri, 7 Jul 2017 14:53:09 +0100 Jonathan Dowland 
wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 03:31:18PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> >I would be interested if there were.  I've never seen such an option
> ...
> >Let the list know what you discover.
> 
> I'm surprised to report that the option do manually select software is
> no longer there. As I recall, it was essentially invoking aptitude
> within d-i, either after or instead of the normal task selection
> stage. I've just gone through an expert mode install with stretch
> netinst and that option is no longer available.

The consequences of "progress."

Well, at least, there's still a "base" install option, and build up
from there. What I did when I upgraded from Fedora 12 (running about 6
months past EOL) to Wheezy five years ago.

Thanks for the heads up.

B

Re: Replace systemd

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 03:31:18PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:

I would be interested if there were.  I've never seen such an option

...

Let the list know what you discover.


I'm surprised to report that the option do manually select software is
no longer there. As I recall, it was essentially invoking aptitude
within d-i, either after or instead of the normal task selection stage.
I've just gone through an expert mode install with stretch netinst and
that option is no longer available.

--

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net
⠈⠳⣄ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.

Re: Replace systemd

[Joel Rees]

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 12:42 AM, Reco  wrote:
>   [...]
>> >
>> >> This behaviour on a critical component is mere madness.
>> >
>> > OpenBSD folks beg to differ.
>> >
>> > https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech=149902196520920=2
>>
>> They were mocking systemd, not adopting the behaviour...
>
> Rly? But why? That's legitimate patch aimed on improving compatibility
> and interoperability. I certainly expect this patch to land in sudo
> upstream.

You can hurt yourself cherry picking from the openbsd lists.

If you want to know whether Ted was serious, the best approach is to
watch the source tree:

http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.bin/doas/

Check the date on the message, and, BTW, read the whole thread,
while you're at it, if you haven't. Ask yourself why the debate fizzled.

Check the date again, check who owns doas, check the last change
to the source tree.

What is missing?

-- 
Joel Rees

One of these days I'll get someone to pay me
to design a language that combines the best of Forth and C.
Then I'll be able to leap wide instruction sets with a single #ifdef,
run faster than a speeding infinite loop with a #define,
and stop all integer size bugs with my bare cast.
http://defining-computers.blogspot.com/2017/06/reinventing-computers.html

More of my delusions:
http://reiisi.blogspot.com/2017/05/do-not-pay-modern-danegeld-ransomware.html
http://reiisi.blogspot.jp/p/novels-i-am-writing.html

Re: Re: Replace systemd

[Tom Dial]

On 07/06/2017 10:00 AM, Reco wrote:
>   Hi.
> 
> On Thu, 6 Jul 2017 15:49:41 +0200
> Erwan David  wrote:
> 
>>> True. But does libsystemd0 count? It's a library, not an executable.
>>>
>> There are also packages which add a dependency on systemd whereas the
>> same software works perfectly on FreeBSD, thus without anything
>> ressembling it (eg hplip).
>> This leads to upgrade from a jessie without systemd will install it.

I am not a particular fan of systemd, but have learned to live with it,
on the basis that deviations from the default install are likely to lead
to more work, possibly exponentially, down the line.

That said, the hplip in Devuan 2.0 seems to be identical to that in
Stretch, and neither, therefore would depend on (or recommend) systemd.

The output of "dpkg --status hplip" is identical on the two systems.


> 
> I did obligatory 'apt-get upgrade; apt-get dist-upgrade' at least 5
> times so far (jessie→stretch). Different architectures, different
> purposes. There was no systemd on those before the upgrade, and there
> is no systemd after it.
> 
> But, I don't use GNOME and do not force it on users. Using GNOME may be
> considered a cruel and unusual punishment in some countries, I don't
> need that.
> 
> And I prefer to keep hplip on a printserver, 'cause I see no reason to
> install the thing on a desktops multiple times. Same thing with cups.
> 
> If apt insists on installing unwanted packages into your system - I can
> only suggest you to consider learning the way apt works.
> 
> 
> Besides, there's no point in complaining about it here.
> To actually change something they suggest users to invoke an excellent
> reportbug utility and transfer their wishes directly to bugs.debian.org.
> 
> Reco
> 

Tom Dial

Re: Replace systemd

[Patrick Bartek]

On Thu, 6 Jul 2017 20:55:48 +0100 Jonathan Dowland 
wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 09:02:24AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> >Even in Expert Mode, there's no choice to install an alternate init.
> >And with systemd being a major system dependency in Debian, it's
> >always going to be around regardless of which init you migrate to.
> 
> I believe expert mode offers you a choice to select packages manually,
> at which point you can select the init of your choice. But tell you
> what, I'll actually try this Tomorrow to ensure that it is still the
> case.

I would be interested if there were.  I've never seen such an option
previously.

When I did my test evaluation installs of Stretch RC3 a few weeks ago, I
used the LXDE install disk since LXDE uses Openbox as its window
manager, the one I prefer, to save time instead of messing with the
Expert Mode, which I normally use.

I'm about to do a final test install in VirtualBox before doing it for
real, but it won't be tomorrow.  Maybe in a week.

Let the list know what you discover.

Thanks

B

Re: Replace systemd

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 09:02:24AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:

Even in Expert Mode, there's no choice to install an alternate init.
And with systemd being a major system dependency in Debian, it's always
going to be around regardless of which init you migrate to.


I believe expert mode offers you a choice to select packages manually,
at which point you can select the init of your choice. But tell you
what, I'll actually try this Tomorrow to ensure that it is still the
case.

--

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland

⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net
⠈⠳⣄ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.

Re: Replace systemd

[Patrick Bartek]

On Thu, 6 Jul 2017 10:57:55 +0100 Jonathan Dowland 
wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 04:32:17PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> >If you're referring to "preseed" or "debootstrap" scenerios, those
> >are more "work-arounds" than a choice from within the installer --
> >What my original query was about.  While they work, so does the
> >other option of switching inits after the system install is
> >complete.  The latter, I think, is less problematical.  No matter ...
> 
> No, I was referring to the expert mode option where you get to select
> the exact packages you want. But yes, the preseeding and debootstrap
> options are there too, you are right.

Even in Expert Mode, there's no choice to install an alternate init.
And with systemd being a major system dependency in Debian, it's always
going to be around regardless of which init you migrate to. 

B

Re: Replace systemd

[Reco]

Hi.

On Thu, 6 Jul 2017 15:49:41 +0200
Erwan David  wrote:

> > True. But does libsystemd0 count? It's a library, not an executable.
> > 
> There are also packages which add a dependency on systemd whereas the
> same software works perfectly on FreeBSD, thus without anything
> ressembling it (eg hplip).
> This leads to upgrade from a jessie without systemd will install it.

I did obligatory 'apt-get upgrade; apt-get dist-upgrade' at least 5
times so far (jessie→stretch). Different architectures, different
purposes. There was no systemd on those before the upgrade, and there
is no systemd after it.

But, I don't use GNOME and do not force it on users. Using GNOME may be
considered a cruel and unusual punishment in some countries, I don't
need that.

And I prefer to keep hplip on a printserver, 'cause I see no reason to
install the thing on a desktops multiple times. Same thing with cups.

If apt insists on installing unwanted packages into your system - I can
only suggest you to consider learning the way apt works.


Besides, there's no point in complaining about it here.
To actually change something they suggest users to invoke an excellent
reportbug utility and transfer their wishes directly to bugs.debian.org.

Reco

Re: Replace systemd

[Reco]

Hi.


On Thu, 6 Jul 2017 15:27:04 +0200
Erwan David  wrote:

> Le 07/06/17 à 13:48, Reco a écrit :
> > Hi.
> > 
> > On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 12:53:29PM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> >> Le 07/03/17 à 22:48, Dejan Jocic a écrit :
> >>>
> >>> You can still use Debian without systemd as init. Explained here:
> >>>
> >>> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/05/msg00538.html
> >>>
> >>> If you would prefer that it is some derivate/fork of Debian without
> >>> systemd, I do not have personal experience with those, but I'm sure that
> >>> you will get few hints.
> >>>
> >> init is a small part of systemd. And judging y the bug reported and how
> >> they are treated, I do not trust any part of it.
> >> Neither resolved, logind, etc...
> > 
> > So you do not trust udev as well?
> > 
> > 
> >> Too many critical bugs found in them and treated by the upstream
> >> developpers with only contempt for the people reporting them
> >> (see https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/6237#issuecomment-312458445)
> > 
> > By that logic (in)famous libc bug 4980 shoud've stopped by from using
> > any sane Linux distribution 10 years ago. Did it?
> >
> Most important is not the presence of bugs. It is the way people in
> charge deal with them.

My point exactly. #4980 is the reason they call Ulrich Drepper 'Stop
Reopening'. But also, #4980 was fixed.
Just the same as #6237 will be fixed in a sane way. At least that's the
fine folks on oss-security are promising right now.


> > 
> >> This behaviour on a critical component is mere madness.
> > 
> > OpenBSD folks beg to differ.
> > 
> > https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech=149902196520920=2
> 
> They were mocking systemd, not adopting the behaviour...

Rly? But why? That's legitimate patch aimed on improving compatibility
and interoperability. I certainly expect this patch to land in sudo
upstream.

Reco

Re: Replace systemd

[Patrick Bartek]

On Thu, 6 Jul 2017 11:50:24 +0100 Jonathan Dowland 
wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 04:41:42PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> >All that can be done on a window manager only system, too.  Just
> >install the utility needed, either terminal or X-based..
> 
> You are missing the point entirely. I was not arguing it was
> impossible to get that functionality without using a desktop
> environment. I was arguing that some people *want* the desktop
> environment to do that for them. Of course you can DIY. But not
> everyone wants to.

Yes, I misunderstood you.. Some people for whatever reasons
believe window manager only GUIs are "limited" or "inferior" to desktop
environments.  I thought you were one, and was trying to correct that
misconception.  My apologies.  For the record, I'm not advocating
abolishing the Desktop environment.  I believe in choice.  As much as
possible. Most people want automatic transmission.  I prefer manual.
To each his own.

B

Re: Replace systemd

[JPlews]

On 06/07/17 13:10, Greg Wooledge wrote:

On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 07:34:04AM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:

But that is not the scenario I am discussing. I am discussing the
experience which an ordinary user, who simply selects from the options
which the installer lists, will have. (My use of the term "option" in
the quoted paragraph, as well as the one preceding it in my last mail,
was referring to the options which the installer presents.)



...


As Don Armstrong already said, the Debian developers are *not* going
to change the installer to add the option you keep yelling for.  Just
get over it.



The installer needs less, perhaps only choosing between network and 
physically accessible systems and installing ssh or a single default DE.


Being invited to use a CLI during the installer would be good for the 
health of new users and support all esoteric choices*, and if not 
desirable does this person care about what's managing their windows any 
more than what's doing their init? If they are is this because they are 
invited to think about the choices?

Re: Replace systemd

[Erwan David]

Le 07/06/17 à 15:27, Reco a écrit :
> On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 08:45:30AM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:
>> On 2017-07-06 at 07:48, Reco wrote:
>>
>>> Hi.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 12:53:29PM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
>>>
 Le 07/03/17 à 22:48, Dejan Jocic a écrit :

> You can still use Debian without systemd as init. Explained
> here:
>
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/05/msg00538.html
>
> If you would prefer that it is some derivate/fork of Debian
> without systemd, I do not have personal experience with those,
> but I'm sure that you will get few hints.

 init is a small part of systemd. And judging y the bug reported and
 how they are treated, I do not trust any part of it. Neither
 resolved, logind, etc...
>>>
>>> So you do not trust udev as well?
>>
>> I consider it unfortunate that udev is maintained as part of the systemd
>> suite, rather than being maintained independently (even if by the same
>> people), purely from a separation-of-distinct-things perspective.
>>
>> I haven't seen any relevant problems with it to date, however; the worst
>> aspect of that maintenance situation is that it means upgrading udev
>> shows the systemd changelog (which rarely has any relevant changes
>> listed), rather than only a changelog for udev itself.
> 
> Um. So called Predictable Network Interface Names, for starters.
> Does *very funny* things to Debian (anything that have net.ifnames=1
> really) running in ESXi.
> 
> Somewhat old, but truly golden story about udev and firmware loading -
> https://lwn.net/Articles/518942/
> 
> And, of course #762018 deserves a honorable mention.
> 
> 
 And it is NOT possible to use debian without any part of systemd.
>>>
>>> Indeed it is. It is not possible to use Debian without udev.
>>> Everything else is optional though.
>>
>> You do at least also need libsystemd0 - or at any rate, trying to remove
>> that on my (otherwise systemd-free) system results in removing 735
>> packages, and leaving at least a few hundred others in "automatically
>> installed, would be removed by autoremove" state.
> 
> True. But does libsystemd0 count? It's a library, not an executable.
> 
> Reco
> 
There are also packages which add a dependency on systemd whereas the
same software works perfectly on FreeBSD, thus without anything
ressembling it (eg hplip).
This leads to upgrade from a jessie without systemd will install it.

Re: Replace systemd

[Erwan David]

Le 07/06/17 à 13:48, Reco a écrit :
>   Hi.
> 
> On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 12:53:29PM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
>> Le 07/03/17 à 22:48, Dejan Jocic a écrit :
>>>
>>> You can still use Debian without systemd as init. Explained here:
>>>
>>> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/05/msg00538.html
>>>
>>> If you would prefer that it is some derivate/fork of Debian without
>>> systemd, I do not have personal experience with those, but I'm sure that
>>> you will get few hints.
>>>
>> init is a small part of systemd. And judging y the bug reported and how
>> they are treated, I do not trust any part of it.
>> Neither resolved, logind, etc...
> 
> So you do not trust udev as well?
> 
> 
>> Too many critical bugs found in them and treated by the upstream
>> developpers with only contempt for the people reporting them
>> (see https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/6237#issuecomment-312458445)
> 
> By that logic (in)famous libc bug 4980 shoud've stopped by from using
> any sane Linux distribution 10 years ago. Did it?
>
Most important is not the presence of bugs. It is the way people in
charge deal with them.

> 
>> This behaviour on a critical component is mere madness.
> 
> OpenBSD folks beg to differ.
> 
> https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech=149902196520920=2

They were mocking systemd, not adopting the behaviour...

Re: Replace systemd

[Reco]

On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 08:45:30AM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:
> On 2017-07-06 at 07:48, Reco wrote:
> 
> > Hi.
> > 
> > On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 12:53:29PM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> > 
> >> Le 07/03/17 à 22:48, Dejan Jocic a écrit :
> >> 
> >>> You can still use Debian without systemd as init. Explained
> >>> here:
> >>> 
> >>> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/05/msg00538.html
> >>> 
> >>> If you would prefer that it is some derivate/fork of Debian
> >>> without systemd, I do not have personal experience with those,
> >>> but I'm sure that you will get few hints.
> >> 
> >> init is a small part of systemd. And judging y the bug reported and
> >> how they are treated, I do not trust any part of it. Neither
> >> resolved, logind, etc...
> > 
> > So you do not trust udev as well?
> 
> I consider it unfortunate that udev is maintained as part of the systemd
> suite, rather than being maintained independently (even if by the same
> people), purely from a separation-of-distinct-things perspective.
> 
> I haven't seen any relevant problems with it to date, however; the worst
> aspect of that maintenance situation is that it means upgrading udev
> shows the systemd changelog (which rarely has any relevant changes
> listed), rather than only a changelog for udev itself.

Um. So called Predictable Network Interface Names, for starters.
Does *very funny* things to Debian (anything that have net.ifnames=1
really) running in ESXi.

Somewhat old, but truly golden story about udev and firmware loading -
https://lwn.net/Articles/518942/

And, of course #762018 deserves a honorable mention.


> >> And it is NOT possible to use debian without any part of systemd.
> > 
> > Indeed it is. It is not possible to use Debian without udev.
> > Everything else is optional though.
> 
> You do at least also need libsystemd0 - or at any rate, trying to remove
> that on my (otherwise systemd-free) system results in removing 735
> packages, and leaving at least a few hundred others in "automatically
> installed, would be removed by autoremove" state.

True. But does libsystemd0 count? It's a library, not an executable.

Reco

Re: Replace systemd

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 07:34:04AM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:

Am I?


I'm bored now of repeating myself.


Certainly there are ways to set things up in advance so that the
installer will never install the systemd-sysv package (or at least there
are reported to be - I've never tried any of them myself


*screeching halt*

Let me know when you have, and I may be prepared to discuss it with
you again.


--

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland

⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net
⠈⠳⣄ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.

Re: Replace systemd

[The Wanderer]

On 2017-07-06 at 07:48, Reco wrote:

> Hi.
> 
> On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 12:53:29PM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> 
>> Le 07/03/17 à 22:48, Dejan Jocic a écrit :
>> 
>>> You can still use Debian without systemd as init. Explained
>>> here:
>>> 
>>> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/05/msg00538.html
>>> 
>>> If you would prefer that it is some derivate/fork of Debian
>>> without systemd, I do not have personal experience with those,
>>> but I'm sure that you will get few hints.
>> 
>> init is a small part of systemd. And judging y the bug reported and
>> how they are treated, I do not trust any part of it. Neither
>> resolved, logind, etc...
> 
> So you do not trust udev as well?

I consider it unfortunate that udev is maintained as part of the systemd
suite, rather than being maintained independently (even if by the same
people), purely from a separation-of-distinct-things perspective.

I haven't seen any relevant problems with it to date, however; the worst
aspect of that maintenance situation is that it means upgrading udev
shows the systemd changelog (which rarely has any relevant changes
listed), rather than only a changelog for udev itself.

>> And it is NOT possible to use debian without any part of systemd.
> 
> Indeed it is. It is not possible to use Debian without udev.
> Everything else is optional though.

You do at least also need libsystemd0 - or at any rate, trying to remove
that on my (otherwise systemd-free) system results in removing 735
packages, and leaving at least a few hundred others in "automatically
installed, would be removed by autoremove" state.

-- 
   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

Re: Replace systemd

[Greg Wooledge]

On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 07:34:04AM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:
> But that is not the scenario I am discussing. I am discussing the
> experience which an ordinary user, who simply selects from the options
> which the installer lists, will have. (My use of the term "option" in
> the quoted paragraph, as well as the one preceding it in my last mail,
> was referring to the options which the installer presents.)

The experience of the ordinary user installing Debian is that they
will have systemd, and things will just work.

Of course, this may require that they use an installer with non-free
firmware for support of their proprietary hardware, but that's outside
the context of your init system activism/trolling.

They also need to *NOT* use a live CD image, because those have never
worked.  Again, a separate issue, but it's far more important than
yours.  We get multiple users *per day* in #debian asking how to work
around whatever their live-CD-install broke.  Care to guess how many
users we get per day asking how to replace systemd?

As Don Armstrong already said, the Debian developers are *not* going
to change the installer to add the option you keep yelling for.  Just
get over it.

Re: Replace systemd

[Reco]

Hi.

On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 12:53:29PM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> Le 07/03/17 à 22:48, Dejan Jocic a écrit :
> > 
> > You can still use Debian without systemd as init. Explained here:
> > 
> > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/05/msg00538.html
> > 
> > If you would prefer that it is some derivate/fork of Debian without
> > systemd, I do not have personal experience with those, but I'm sure that
> > you will get few hints.
> > 
> init is a small part of systemd. And judging y the bug reported and how
> they are treated, I do not trust any part of it.
> Neither resolved, logind, etc...

So you do not trust udev as well?


> Too many critical bugs found in them and treated by the upstream
> developpers with only contempt for the people reporting them
> (see https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/6237#issuecomment-312458445)

By that logic (in)famous libc bug 4980 shoud've stopped by from using
any sane Linux distribution 10 years ago. Did it?


> This behaviour on a critical component is mere madness.

OpenBSD folks beg to differ.

https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech=149902196520920=2


> And it is NOT possible to use debian without any part of systemd.

Indeed it is. It is not possible to use Debian without udev. Everything
else is optional though.

Reco

Re: Replace systemd

[The Wanderer]

On 2017-07-06 at 04:09, Dejan Jocic wrote:

> On 06-07-17, David Griffith wrote:
> 
>> I'm aware of that technique.  What I was talking about is a menu
>> option that pops up when the install is running that explicitly
>> asks the person installing which init to use.
> 
> There was no such option when SysVinit was default. Why would it
> exist now?

Because now there are multiple prominent init-system alternatives from
which to choose, and the question has been brought to the forefront
since we are no longer running purely on inertia in this matter.

My own preferred way of addressing the init-system dispute would have
been to add exactly this sort of installer option for jessie, without
changing the default away from sysvinit, and then change the default to
systemd for *stretch*, while retaining the installer option.

We had no option for a long time because there was only one init system
that was meaningfully available, and then because the possible
alternatives (even if being seriously considered) were not particularly
controversial. That was inertia and laziness, and is not a good way of
doing things.

Now that the fact of this omission has been brought to our attention,
the right thing to do would be to provide such an option, and once the
option is established in the ecosystem, *then* change which alternative
is selected by default.

I would say that even if sysvinit were still the default alternative.
Once the fact that you've been omitting an option to choose where
meaningful choice exists is known, to fail to correct that omission is a
fault.

> There are also no options to choose default browser, editor, video 
> player, music player and so on. But everyone is free to install and
> set as default whatever they like. Including init system.

IIRC there is an option to choose default WM or DE, however, albeit from
a limited list (I'm thinking of task-gnome-desktop, task-kde-desktop,
task-xfce-desktop, etc.) - and there is the option to install without
any of the above and make the decision later, whereas there is no such
option for the init system.

Most of those aren't nearly as controversial as the init-system choice
has proven, either - and the ones which are (vi vs. emacs, anyone?)
don't tend to install *any* of the controversial options by default,
last time I checked. Since not installing an init system isn't a
meaningful possibility, providing a "select your choice" option is the
next best thing.

-- 
   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

Re: Replace systemd

[The Wanderer]

On 2017-07-06 at 06:54, Jonathan Dowland wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 10:57:14PM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:
> 
>> Since it is not even conceptually possible to install Debian with
>> no init system at all (even if an option to do so existed, what
>> would it *do* in practice?), having there be an option to select
>> which of the available init systems should be installed - rather
>> than having to let the system install one, then clean it up later
>> on if that one is not the one you wanted -
> 
> You are arguing from a false premise: that the only way to install
> Debian is to first install systemd, then replace it with sysvinit.

Am I?

Certainly there are ways to set things up in advance so that the
installer will never install the systemd-sysv package (or at least there
are reported to be - I've never tried any of them myself, so I can't
speak from personal experience, but I also have no reason to doubt the
people who say that they exist).

But that is not the scenario I am discussing. I am discussing the
experience which an ordinary user, who simply selects from the options
which the installer lists, will have. (My use of the term "option" in
the quoted paragraph, as well as the one preceding it in my last mail,
was referring to the options which the installer presents.)

If there is a way to achieve the result you describe in that limited
context, I am not aware of it.

If my argument is based on that premise in some other way, I'm not
seeing how; could you clarify?

>> can seem like the solution least biased in favor of any particular
>> init system.
> 
> It seems quite proper that there *is* a bias here: towards the system
> that Debian recommends, that is judged to be the best choice for the
> majority of users, and will receive the most testing.

There's still room to argue about the degree to which that bias should
be manifest, however.

It seems hard to dispute that that bias should extend at least as far as
determining which init system will be installed if the user does not
take action to select an alternative one. That's more or less the
definition of "default" in this context.

It also seems hard to dispute that the bias should *not* extend as far
as actively impeding the ability to install and make active another init
system. Fortunately, Debian does not actually do that, and I'm not sure
I've seen anyone argue that it should.

That would establish the outer bounds; in between, disputing any
specific proposition becomes easier, and arguing against such becomes
harder. For example, it seems considerably harder to argue that the bias
should extend as far as refusing to present the (few) mature,
established alternatives to be selected - and yet that is exactly what
people arguing against having the installer include an option for this
seem to be doing.

-- 
   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

Re: Replace systemd

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 10:57:14PM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:

Since it is not even conceptually possible to install Debian with no
init system at all (even if an option to do so existed, what would it
*do* in practice?), having there be an option to select which of the
available init systems should be installed - rather than having to let
the system install one, then clean it up later on if that one is not the
one you wanted -


You are arguing from a false premise: that the only way to install 
Debian is to first install systemd, then replace it with sysvinit.



can seem like the solution least biased in favor of any
particular init system.


It seems quite proper that there *is* a bias here: towards the system that
Debian recommends, that is judged to be the best choice for the majority of
users, and will receive the most testing.


--

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland

⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net
⠈⠳⣄ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.

Re: Replace systemd

[Erwan David]

Le 07/03/17 à 22:48, Dejan Jocic a écrit :
> 
> You can still use Debian without systemd as init. Explained here:
> 
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/05/msg00538.html
> 
> If you would prefer that it is some derivate/fork of Debian without
> systemd, I do not have personal experience with those, but I'm sure that
> you will get few hints.
> 
init is a small part of systemd. And judging y the bug reported and how
they are treated, I do not trust any part of it.
Neither resolved, logind, etc...
Too many critical bugs found in them and treated by the upstream
developpers with only contempt for the people reporting them
(see https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/6237#issuecomment-312458445)

This behaviour on a critical component is mere madness.
And it is NOT possible to use debian without any part of systemd.

For me debian stretch is inherently unsecure because of this and I am in
the process of replacing it on any machine I own (mostly by FreeBSD), I
may try a gentoo or a devuan.

Re: Replace systemd

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 04:49:41PM -0700, Jimmy Johnson wrote:
Is it true that systemd only allows sysvinit to run inside of systemd, in fact 
systemd is starting your computer and shutting down your computer and still 
running in the background while you are using your computer?


No. It is not true.

--

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland

⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net
⠈⠳⣄ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.

Re: Replace systemd

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 04:41:42PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:

All that can be done on a window manager only system, too.  Just install
the utility needed, either terminal or X-based..


You are missing the point entirely. I was not arguing it was impossible
to get that functionality without using a desktop environment. I was
arguing that some people *want* the desktop environment to do that for
them. Of course you can DIY. But not everyone wants to.

--

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland

⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net
⠈⠳⣄ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.

Re: Replace systemd

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 04:32:17PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:

If you're referring to "preseed" or "debootstrap" scenerios, those are
more "work-arounds" than a choice from within the installer -- What
my original query was about.  While they work, so does the other option
of switching inits after the system install is complete.  The latter, I
think, is less problematical.  No matter ...


No, I was referring to the expert mode option where you get to select the
exact packages you want. But yes, the preseeding and debootstrap options
are there too, you are right.

--

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland

⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net
⠈⠳⣄ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.

And the UNasked questions are? - was [Re: Replace systemd]

[Richard Owlett]

On 07/05/2017 10:25 PM, David Griffith wrote:

[snip]
I'm aware of that technique.  What I was talking about is a menu
option that pops up when the install is running that explicitly
asks the person installing which init to use.



On 07/06/2017 01:28 AM, Ansgar Burchardt replied:

But there are far more urgent questions that don't get asked
at install time either:

1. Which editor to use at the default editor.
   (Even worse: emacs isn't even included in the install by default!)
2. Which shell to use as the login shell.
   I still have to install my favorite shell (zsh) manually :-(
3. Which web browser to install. Not everyone prefers Firefox.>
4. Which mail user agent to install.

I can go on.  All have to be chosen after install and I don't think
there is a good reason the init system should be special: likely a
larger number people cares more about the software they use all the
time.  So if anything, one should probably ask about that.


On 07/06/2017 03:09 AM, Dejan Jocic also replied:

There was no such option when SysVinit was default. Why would it
exist now? There are also no options to choose default browser,
editor, video player, music player and so on. But everyone is
free  to install and set as default whatever they like.
Including init system.



I would include among those UNasked questions:
  1. What is a common feature of the above and others in this thread?
  2.Thus, what is the Catch-22 quagmire faced by the installer team?

Re: Replace systemd

[David Griffith]

On July 5, 2017 9:11:27 AM PDT, The Wanderer  wrote:
>On 2017-07-05 at 11:27, Don Armstrong wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 04 Jul 2017, David Griffith wrote:
>
>>> It would be nice to have an install-time option for selecting the
>desired init.
>> 
>> It already exists:
>> 
>> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/04/msg00097.html
>> 
>> «
>> You can just append:
>> 
>> preseed/late_command="in-target apt-get install -y sysvinit-core"
>> 
>> to the installer command line.
>
>I suspect that what the people who ask for this are thinking of is a
>step in the installer sequence at which you are prompted to choose
>which
>init system you want to be installed, such that the installer will
>never
>even attempt to install any other init system.
>
>This differs from the suggested methods to date not only in avoiding
>"systemd-sysv was installed, then sysvinit-core replaced it later on"
>(which some of the suggested methods may also do), but also in the UX;
>having it presented to you as a choice, rather than having to know
>about
>it in advance and take separate steps on your own, makes a significant
>cosmetic and psychological difference, as well as affecting
>discoverability.
>
>If the installer doesn't present the option, then it's not really "an
>install-time option" in a certain sense; it takes on more the shape of
>advanced / expert hackery, rather than appearing to be something the
>developers actually support.
>
>I think that's the mindset, anyway.
>
>-- 
>   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

These are exactly my motivations for an install-time prompt.
-- 
David Griffith
d...@661.org

Re: Replace systemd

[Dejan Jocic]

On 06-07-17, David Griffith wrote:
> 
> I'm aware of that technique.  What I was talking about is a menu option that
> pops up when the install is running that explicitly asks the person
> installing which init to use.
> 
> 
> -- 
> David Griffith
> d...@661.org
> 
> A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
> Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
> A: Top-posting.
> Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?


There was no such option when SysVinit was default. Why would it exist
now? There are also no options to choose default browser, editor, video
player, music player and so on. But everyone is free to install and set
as default whatever they like. Including init system.

Re: Replace systemd

[Ansgar Burchardt]

David Griffith writes:
> I'm aware of that technique.  What I was talking about is a menu
> option that pops up when the install is running that explicitly asks
> the person installing which init to use.

But there are far more urgent questions that don't get asked at install
time either:

1. Which editor to use at the default editor.
   (Even worse: emacs isn't even included in the install by default!)

2. Which shell to use as the login shell.
   I still have to install my favorite shell (zsh) manually :-(

3. Which web browser to install. Not everyone prefers Firefox.

4. Which mail user agent to install.

I can go on.  All have to be chosen after install and I don't think
there is a good reason the init system should be special: likely a
larger number people cares more about the software they use all the
time.  So if anything, one should probably ask about that.

Ansgar

Re: Replace systemd

[Don Armstrong]

On Thu, 06 Jul 2017, David Griffith wrote:
> I'm aware of that technique. What I was talking about is a menu option
> that pops up when the install is running that explicitly asks the
> person installing which init to use.

We're not going to add such an option, because every additional question
asked during the install makes the install more difficult for new users.

If you want a non-default init system, you should know enough to supply
the incantation to the installer or know how to operate apt-get on your
own. If that's too difficult, then you should stick with the default.

-- 
Don Armstrong  https://www.donarmstrong.com

"I always tend to assume there's an infinite amount of money out
there." "There might as well be, [...] but most of it gets spent on
pornography, sugar water, and bombs. There is only so much that can be
scraped together for particle accelerators."
 -- Neal Stephenson _Anathem_ p262

Re: Replace systemd

[Jimmy Johnson]

On 07/04/2017 09:33 PM, Jimmy Johnson wrote:

On 07/03/2017 01:41 PM, Jim Ohlstein wrote:


Is there a pure Debian alternative?


Have a look at https://devuan.org/.


A couple of hours ago this was Debian Wheezy with the 
kde-plasma-desktop.  Now it's Devuan Jessie and kde-plasma-desktop and 
the only systemd is "libsystemd0" and it seems to be required for kde. 
This is a very smart system and an easy upgrade. I think some of Linux 
best developers are working on Devuan.


To be fair I found a problem with that system that I do not have with 
Debian Jessie and have not yet fixed it, I wanted to kick back and watch 
a dvd movie and the Devuan Jessie system would not acknowledge that 
there was a dvd movie in the drive, even with the drive in fstab, but 
will see a iso image on a dvd when I put that into the drive, anyways 
it's something to tinker with.

--
Jimmy Johnson

Debian Sid/Testing - KDE Plasma 5.8.7 - Linux 4.9 - EXT4 at sda15
Registered Linux User #380263

Re: Replace systemd

[David Griffith]

On Wed, 5 Jul 2017, Don Armstrong wrote:


On Tue, 04 Jul 2017, David Griffith wrote:

On July 3, 2017 1:44:30 PM PDT, Martin Read  wrote:

On 03/07/17 20:42, Rory Campbell-Lange wrote:

Is there a pure Debian alternative?


There is an alternative init daemon, in the form of sysvinit (install
the package "sysvinit-core" to use this as your init daemon), and there
are several solutions for service management.



It would be nice to have an install-time option for selecting the 
desired init.


It already exists:

https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/04/msg00097.html

«
You can just append:

preseed/late_command="in-target apt-get install -y sysvinit-core"

to the installer command line.

Or you can roll your own install media with its own syslinux.cfg which
adds that or something more complicated in a preseed file.

You don't need to fork the installer, or submit any patches upstream.

If you want something more complicated, like not installing systemd at
all, you'll have to pass --include and --exclude options to debootstrap
using the base-installer/includes and base-installer/excludes preseed
options; something like:

base-installer/includes=sysvinit-core base-installer/excludes=systemd-sysv

but that's totally untested.
»


I'm aware of that technique.  What I was talking about is a menu option 
that pops up when the install is running that explicitly asks the person 
installing which init to use.



--
David Griffith
d...@661.org

A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

Re: Replace systemd

[The Wanderer]

On 2017-07-05 at 12:44, Greg Wooledge wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 12:11:27PM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:
> 
>> I suspect that what the people who ask for this are thinking of is
>> a step in the installer sequence at which you are prompted to
>> choose which init system you want to be installed, such that the
>> installer will never even attempt to install any other init
>> system.
> 
> Yes, yes, we know.  But they're not going to GET this, so we are
> giving them alternative ways to accomplish their goals.

And that's fair enough, but it's very different from what Don pointed to
in saying that this "already exists".

> I use fvwm, but you don't hear me asking for the debian-installer
> team to add a user interface option to let me install fvwm.  This is
> because I'm in a *small minority* of users, and it's not worth their
> time to build a user interface option that only a small minority of
> users are going to care about, especially when I can achieve the same
> goal by running a simple apt-get command after the install.

One difference there is that there *is* an option to install Debian with
*no* WM, DE, or similar, and only install whichever one you choose later on.

Since it is not even conceptually possible to install Debian with no
init system at all (even if an option to do so existed, what would it
*do* in practice?), having there be an option to select which of the
available init systems should be installed - rather than having to let
the system install one, then clean it up later on if that one is not the
one you wanted - can seem like the solution least biased in favor of any
particular init system.

(Imagine if you didn't have the option to install just the "base"
system, with no graphical interface, and had to install with a
pre-chosen default - GNOME,or KDE, or IceWM, or whatever you care to
name - and then remove that later in order to get fvwm in place. Sure,
you could still *do* it, but wouldn't it seem just as reasonable to ask
for an install-time option? Particularly if there were only a tiny
handful of WMs, etc., available, rather than the proliferation which
actually exist.)

> Likewise, people who prefer sysvinit are a small minority, and they
> can achieve their goal by running a simple apt-get command after the
> install. There is no need to rewrite a complex user interface to
> accomodate this.

I think I disagree with one of the underlying principles of this
viewpoint, but I can't quite identify what that principle is at the
moment, and I kind of want to get to bed right now.

-- 
   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

Re: Replace systemd

[Jimmy Johnson]

On 07/05/2017 08:27 AM, Don Armstrong wrote:

On Tue, 04 Jul 2017, David Griffith wrote:

On July 3, 2017 1:44:30 PM PDT, Martin Read  wrote:

On 03/07/17 20:42, Rory Campbell-Lange wrote:

Is there a pure Debian alternative?


There is an alternative init daemon, in the form of sysvinit (install
the package "sysvinit-core" to use this as your init daemon), and there
are several solutions for service management.



It would be nice to have an install-time option for selecting the desired init.


It already exists:

https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/04/msg00097.html

«
You can just append:

preseed/late_command="in-target apt-get install -y sysvinit-core"

to the installer command line.

Or you can roll your own install media with its own syslinux.cfg which
adds that or something more complicated in a preseed file.

You don't need to fork the installer, or submit any patches upstream.

If you want something more complicated, like not installing systemd at
all, you'll have to pass --include and --exclude options to debootstrap
using the base-installer/includes and base-installer/excludes preseed
options; something like:

base-installer/includes=sysvinit-core base-installer/excludes=systemd-sysv

but that's totally untested.


Hey Don, longtime no see,

Is it true that systemd only allows sysvinit to run inside of systemd, 
in fact systemd is starting your computer and shutting down your 
computer and still running in the background while you are using your 
computer?


Seeking truth.
--
Jimmy Johnson

Debian Buster - KDE Plasma 5.8.7 - Intel G3220 - EXT4 at sda14
Registered Linux User #380263

Re: Replace systemd

[Patrick Bartek]

On Wed, 5 Jul 2017 13:53:10 +0100 Jonathan Dowland 
wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 03:11:05PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> >My thoughts exactly.  I stopped using GNOME or any desktop
> >environment 5+ years ago.  Resource hogs..  A window manager, a
> >single panel and a couple virtual terminals are more than sufficient.
> 
> What's good enough for you is not necessarily good enough for
> everyone else. I likewise am very comfortable in a Terminal, however,
> many aren't. Furthermore, there are nowadays lots of other bits and
> pieces that are very useful in a session (a dbus daemon, a GPG and
> SSH keyrings, a power manager and/or screensaver, network manager
> applets, file sync tools, disk mount managers, etc.); you may not
> need these, or may  be happy to effectively assemble a form of a
> desktop environment from scratch, but some people are happy to
> delegate that job to others.

All that can be done on a window manager only system, too.  Just install
the utility needed, either terminal or X-based..

> (I am currently shopping for a desktop session manager)

Sorry, I have no recommendations.  Don't use one. ;-)

B

Re: Replace systemd

[Patrick Bartek]

On Wed, 5 Jul 2017 13:43:43 +0100 JPlews  wrote:

> > 
> > It would be nice to have an install-time option for selecting the
> > desired init.
> > 
> 
> Exactly what I think too, I have been wanting to start a thread about 
> 'Is multi-init at install dead?' but keep getting distracted because 
> it's actually very interesting in terms of social sciences too.

I asked that question already several months ago. Lively discussion for
about a week or two.  Check the archive.  Sorry can't remember the
Subject line, off hand.

B

Re: Replace systemd

[Jimmy Johnson]

On 07/05/2017 09:44 AM, Greg Wooledge wrote:

On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 12:11:27PM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:

I suspect that what the people who ask for this are thinking of is a
step in the installer sequence at which you are prompted to choose which
init system you want to be installed, such that the installer will never
even attempt to install any other init system.


Yes, yes, we know.  But they're not going to GET this, so we are giving
them alternative ways to accomplish their goals.

I use fvwm, but you don't hear me asking for the debian-installer team
to add a user interface option to let me install fvwm.  This is because
I'm in a *small minority* of users, and it's not worth their time to
build a user interface option that only a small minority of users are
going to care about, especially when I can achieve the same goal by
running a simple apt-get command after the install.

Likewise, people who prefer sysvinit are a small minority, and they can
achieve their goal by running a simple apt-get command after the install.
There is no need to rewrite a complex user interface to accomodate this.


Speaking of a minority, Linux was started by one good person, history. 
Individuals rule.


Cheers!
--
Jimmy Johnson

Debian Buster - KDE Plasma 5.8.7 - Intel G3220 - EXT4 at sda14
Registered Linux User #380263

Re: Replace systemd

[Patrick Bartek]

On Wed, 5 Jul 2017 13:57:20 +0100 Jonathan Dowland 
wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 07:15:48PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> >I suggested that a few months ago.  Thread lasted a couple weeks.
> >Lots of Pro and Con with a few "Too Hard to Do" or "Impossible to
> >Do."
> 
> Also several posts of "this is already possible via /this/ method..."
> which seems to have been ignored. Perhaps David will find those
> messages in the archives.

If you're referring to "preseed" or "debootstrap" scenerios, those are
more "work-arounds" than a choice from within the installer -- What
my original query was about.  While they work, so does the other option
of switching inits after the system install is complete.  The latter, I
think, is less problematical.  No matter ...

Systemd through dependencies as well as critical system files (udev,
udisks2, policykit1, etc.) is very entrenched in Debian as well as the
dozen or so other Linux distros that use it.  It is here to stay.  So,
instead of trying to rid Stretch of it, I've decided to just treat it
like any other dependency as long as I can still choose the init system
I prefer and it works as it should.  So far, it does.  Both with
sysvinit and runit.

FWIW, I discovered in Stretch when I switched from systemd-init to
sysvinit, I recovered about 6 to 7 MB of RAM on reboot.  Ditto with
runit-init.

B

Re: Replace systemd

[Jimmy Johnson]

On 07/05/2017 12:38 PM, Jimmy Johnson wrote:

On 07/05/2017 05:56 AM, Jonathan Dowland wrote:

On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 09:33:16PM -0700, Jimmy Johnson wrote:

A couple of hours ago this was Debian Wheezy with the
kde-plasma-desktop.  Now it's Devuan Jessie and kde-plasma-desktop and
the only systemd is "libsystemd0" and it seems to be required for
kde.  This is a very smart system and an easy upgrade. I think some of
Linux best developers are working on Devuan.


This message is the very epitome of Poe's Law. You've switched to Devuan,
a distribution which has the sole purpose of excising systemd from itself
in its entirety, just to run a system with libsystemd0 installed anyway?
And you're a full Debian release behind at the same time!


Was the word you where looking for "exorcise"?

And each year Debian only gets better, until it can't handle your new 
hardware any longer and then you have to upgrade.


..and it's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle..


Anyway, since you are no longer a Debian user, you are unlikely to see
this message, as surely you have dutifully unsubscribed and will not be
posting here anymore, as is right and proper.


Dear Mr Red Hat Developer, Would you like to be my friend on Facebook 
and Twitter?


I'm The Linux Tester with currently more that 50 Linux installs and I'll 
run what ever Linux I want and respond to a thread as I see fit.


Have a good day! :P
--
Jimmy Johnson

Debian Buster - KDE Plasma 5.8.7 - Intel G3220 - EXT4 at sda14
Registered Linux User #380263

Re: Replace systemd

[Jimmy Johnson]

On 07/05/2017 02:23 PM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 01:56:44PM -0700, Jimmy Johnson wrote:

[...]


Is it possible that Devuan is becoming more Debian and Debian is
becoming less Debian? What do you say to that? Hypothetically
speaking of course. :)


Don't think so, no.


Just maybe, all the GOOD Debian developers are being ran off by
Red/Black Hat Hypocrites who disguise themselves as Penguins. Is
that posable? Hypothetically speaking of course. :)


Not helpful, I think. Perhaps it was meant tongue-in-cheek, but
not the kind of humor I enjoy.


You're damned right it's not funny.
--
Jimmy Johnson

Debian Buster - KDE Plasma 5.8.7 - Intel G3220 - EXT4 at sda14
Registered Linux User #380263

Re: Replace systemd

[chris]

systemd: Make Linux Great Again! (c)

On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Jimmy Johnson 
wrote:

> On 07/05/2017 07:18 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 09:48:07AM -0400, Carl Fink wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 01:56:02PM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
>>>
>>> Anyway, since you are no longer a Debian user, you are unlikely to see
 this message, as surely you have dutifully unsubscribed and will not be
 posting here anymore, as is right and proper.

>>>
>>> It's perfectly possible to use both Debian and Devuan [...]
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for reminding us of that :-)
>>
>> Yeah, sadly the scars from The Big Flamewar still itch, and the back-and-
>> forths tend to transport some amount of snide and bitterness under a
>> polite cover[1]. I won't exclude myself from that, mind you!
>>
>> This is the main thing I dislike about Devuan. IMHO their effort would
>> be better spent whithin Debian, making and keeping the other inits in a
>> viable condition, but hey, it's their choice, and it's free software
>> (meaning that Debian might profit from their work anyway, or that even
>> (gasp!) collaboration is possible, as has been between Ubuntu and Debian).
>>
>
> Is it possible that Devuan is becoming more Debian and Debian is becoming
> less Debian? What do you say to that? Hypothetically speaking of course. :)
>
> Just maybe, all the GOOD Debian developers are being ran off by Red/Black
> Hat Hypocrites who disguise themselves as Penguins. Is that posable?
> Hypothetically speaking of course. :)
>
> Cheers
>>
>
> Yes, cheers!
>
> [1] I think this polite cover still has a positive function!
>>
>
> You bet ya!
> --
> Jimmy Johnson
>
> Debian Buster - KDE Plasma 5.8.7 - Intel G3220 - EXT4 at sda14
> Registered Linux User #380263
>
>

Re: Replace systemd

[Rory Campbell-Lange]

On 03/07/17, Greg Wooledge (wool...@eeg.ccf.org) wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 08:42:11PM +0100, Rory Campbell-Lange wrote:
> > Simply put; systemd doesn't suit me. Its a bit like being asked to use
> > an graphical editor instead of vi. Or being forced to use Windows. My
> > laptop doesn't feel like my machine anymore.
> > 
> > Is there a pure Debian alternative?
> 
> You may switch to one of the other init systems.  Assuming stretch
> (Debian 9):
> 
> To use sysvinit, simply "apt-get install sysvinit-core" and reboot.
> 
> To use runit, "apt-get install runit-systemd", reboot, "apt-get install
> runit-init", and reboot again.

For some reason I couldn't get my i3 wm to work with sysvinit-core.

Am trying runit and so far so good.

Thank you for the tips.

Re: Replace systemd

[tomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 01:56:44PM -0700, Jimmy Johnson wrote:

[...]

> Is it possible that Devuan is becoming more Debian and Debian is
> becoming less Debian? What do you say to that? Hypothetically
> speaking of course. :)

Don't think so, no.

> Just maybe, all the GOOD Debian developers are being ran off by
> Red/Black Hat Hypocrites who disguise themselves as Penguins. Is
> that posable? Hypothetically speaking of course. :)

Not helpful, I think. Perhaps it was meant tongue-in-cheek, but
not the kind of humor I enjoy.

regards
- -- t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlldWM4ACgkQBcgs9XrR2kaEqACggWo/Xa6iiqep2ZHhc6syWfNW
bxcAn3sDd/4oPiWM8/q20FDWpUxeq+oj
=FK54
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Replace systemd

[Jimmy Johnson]

On 07/05/2017 07:18 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 09:48:07AM -0400, Carl Fink wrote:

On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 01:56:02PM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:


Anyway, since you are no longer a Debian user, you are unlikely to see
this message, as surely you have dutifully unsubscribed and will not be
posting here anymore, as is right and proper.


It's perfectly possible to use both Debian and Devuan [...]


Thanks for reminding us of that :-)

Yeah, sadly the scars from The Big Flamewar still itch, and the back-and-
forths tend to transport some amount of snide and bitterness under a
polite cover[1]. I won't exclude myself from that, mind you!

This is the main thing I dislike about Devuan. IMHO their effort would
be better spent whithin Debian, making and keeping the other inits in a
viable condition, but hey, it's their choice, and it's free software
(meaning that Debian might profit from their work anyway, or that even
(gasp!) collaboration is possible, as has been between Ubuntu and Debian).


Is it possible that Devuan is becoming more Debian and Debian is 
becoming less Debian? What do you say to that? Hypothetically speaking 
of course. :)


Just maybe, all the GOOD Debian developers are being ran off by 
Red/Black Hat Hypocrites who disguise themselves as Penguins. Is that 
posable? Hypothetically speaking of course. :)



Cheers


Yes, cheers!


[1] I think this polite cover still has a positive function!


You bet ya!
--
Jimmy Johnson

Debian Buster - KDE Plasma 5.8.7 - Intel G3220 - EXT4 at sda14
Registered Linux User #380263

Re: Replace systemd

[Greg Wooledge]

On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 12:11:27PM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:
> I suspect that what the people who ask for this are thinking of is a
> step in the installer sequence at which you are prompted to choose which
> init system you want to be installed, such that the installer will never
> even attempt to install any other init system.

Yes, yes, we know.  But they're not going to GET this, so we are giving
them alternative ways to accomplish their goals.

I use fvwm, but you don't hear me asking for the debian-installer team
to add a user interface option to let me install fvwm.  This is because
I'm in a *small minority* of users, and it's not worth their time to
build a user interface option that only a small minority of users are
going to care about, especially when I can achieve the same goal by
running a simple apt-get command after the install.

Likewise, people who prefer sysvinit are a small minority, and they can
achieve their goal by running a simple apt-get command after the install.
There is no need to rewrite a complex user interface to accomodate this.

Re: Replace systemd

[The Wanderer]

On 2017-07-05 at 11:27, Don Armstrong wrote:

> On Tue, 04 Jul 2017, David Griffith wrote:

>> It would be nice to have an install-time option for selecting the desired 
>> init.
> 
> It already exists:
> 
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/04/msg00097.html
> 
> «
> You can just append:
> 
> preseed/late_command="in-target apt-get install -y sysvinit-core"
> 
> to the installer command line.

I suspect that what the people who ask for this are thinking of is a
step in the installer sequence at which you are prompted to choose which
init system you want to be installed, such that the installer will never
even attempt to install any other init system.

This differs from the suggested methods to date not only in avoiding
"systemd-sysv was installed, then sysvinit-core replaced it later on"
(which some of the suggested methods may also do), but also in the UX;
having it presented to you as a choice, rather than having to know about
it in advance and take separate steps on your own, makes a significant
cosmetic and psychological difference, as well as affecting
discoverability.

If the installer doesn't present the option, then it's not really "an
install-time option" in a certain sense; it takes on more the shape of
advanced / expert hackery, rather than appearing to be something the
developers actually support.

I think that's the mindset, anyway.

-- 
   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

Re: Replace systemd

[Don Armstrong]

On Tue, 04 Jul 2017, David Griffith wrote:
> On July 3, 2017 1:44:30 PM PDT, Martin Read  wrote:
> >On 03/07/17 20:42, Rory Campbell-Lange wrote:
> >> Is there a pure Debian alternative?
> >
> >There is an alternative init daemon, in the form of sysvinit (install 
> >the package "sysvinit-core" to use this as your init daemon), and there
> >are several solutions for service management.
> >
> 
> It would be nice to have an install-time option for selecting the desired 
> init.

It already exists:

https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/04/msg00097.html

«
You can just append:

preseed/late_command="in-target apt-get install -y sysvinit-core"

to the installer command line.

Or you can roll your own install media with its own syslinux.cfg which
adds that or something more complicated in a preseed file.

You don't need to fork the installer, or submit any patches upstream.

If you want something more complicated, like not installing systemd at
all, you'll have to pass --include and --exclude options to debootstrap
using the base-installer/includes and base-installer/excludes preseed
options; something like:

base-installer/includes=sysvinit-core base-installer/excludes=systemd-sysv

but that's totally untested.
»

-- 
Don Armstrong  https://www.donarmstrong.com

No amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free
[...] You can't conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him.
 -- Robert Heinlein _Revolt in 2010_ p54

Re: Replace systemd

[tomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 09:48:07AM -0400, Carl Fink wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 01:56:02PM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> 
> > Anyway, since you are no longer a Debian user, you are unlikely to see
> > this message, as surely you have dutifully unsubscribed and will not be
> > posting here anymore, as is right and proper.
> 
> It's perfectly possible to use both Debian and Devuan [...]

Thanks for reminding us of that :-)

Yeah, sadly the scars from The Big Flamewar still itch, and the back-and-
forths tend to transport some amount of snide and bitterness under a
polite cover[1]. I won't exclude myself from that, mind you!

This is the main thing I dislike about Devuan. IMHO their effort would
be better spent whithin Debian, making and keeping the other inits in a
viable condition, but hey, it's their choice, and it's free software
(meaning that Debian might profit from their work anyway, or that even
(gasp!) collaboration is possible, as has been between Ubuntu and Debian).

Cheers

[1] I think this polite cover still has a positive function!
- -- tomás
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAllc9ToACgkQBcgs9XrR2kaBQACfSw1CNjLV2wsr8YeUYUCaGXm6
52QAnjwtGireVRZma0Qd0i+JAF2ikApg
=yZkc
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Replace systemd

[Carl Fink]

On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 01:56:02PM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:

> Anyway, since you are no longer a Debian user, you are unlikely to see
> this message, as surely you have dutifully unsubscribed and will not be
> posting here anymore, as is right and proper.

It's perfectly possible to use both Debian and Devuan. I personally have 4
PCs just in my apartment (not counting the company laptop), one of which
runs Debian, as does my VPS. Another runs Ubuntu (required to keep it under
warranty, I'm not a big fan) and a third Puppy Linux. 
-- 
Carl Fink   nitpick...@nitpicking.com 

Read my blog at blog.nitpicking.com.  Reviews!  Observations!
Stupid mistakes you can correct!

Re: Replace systemd

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 07:15:48PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:

I suggested that a few months ago.  Thread lasted a couple weeks.  Lots
of Pro and Con with a few "Too Hard to Do" or "Impossible to Do."


Also several posts of "this is already possible via /this/ method..."
which seems to have been ignored. Perhaps David will find those messages in the 
archives.



--

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland

⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net
⠈⠳⣄ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.

Re: Replace systemd

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 09:33:16PM -0700, Jimmy Johnson wrote:
A couple of hours ago this was Debian Wheezy with the kde-plasma-desktop.  Now 
it's Devuan Jessie and kde-plasma-desktop and the only systemd is 
"libsystemd0" and it seems to be required for kde.  This is a very smart 
system and an easy upgrade. I think some of Linux best developers are working 
on Devuan.


This message is the very epitome of Poe's Law. You've switched to Devuan,
a distribution which has the sole purpose of excising systemd from itself
in its entirety, just to run a system with libsystemd0 installed anyway?
And you're a full Debian release behind at the same time!

Anyway, since you are no longer a Debian user, you are unlikely to see
this message, as surely you have dutifully unsubscribed and will not be
posting here anymore, as is right and proper.

--

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland

⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net
⠈⠳⣄ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.

Re: Replace systemd

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 03:11:05PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:

My thoughts exactly.  I stopped using GNOME or any desktop environment
5+ years ago.  Resource hogs..  A window manager, a single panel and a
couple virtual terminals are more than sufficient.


What's good enough for you is not necessarily good enough for everyone else.
I likewise am very comfortable in a Terminal, however, many aren't.  
Furthermore, there are nowadays lots of other bits and pieces that are very

useful in a session (a dbus daemon, a GPG and SSH keyrings, a power manager
and/or screensaver, network manager applets, file sync tools, disk mount
managers, etc.); you may not need these, or may  be happy to effectively 
assemble a form of a desktop environment from scratch, but some people are 
happy to delegate that job to others.


(I am currently shopping for a desktop session manager)


--

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland

⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net
⠈⠳⣄ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.

Re: Replace systemd

[JPlews]

It would be nice to have an install-time option for selecting the desired init.



Exactly what I think too, I have been wanting to start a thread about 
'Is multi-init at install dead?' but keep getting distracted because 
it's actually very interesting in terms of social sciences too.

Re: Replace systemd

[SDA]

On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 07:33:25PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> Jimmy Johnson writes:
> > Funny, that sounds like something a Slack'er would say. Patrick, we
> > are not all keyboard wizards like you and that other Patrick who can
> > keyboard faster than I can read. That's a compliment on your abilities
> > by the way.
> 
> Gnome or the Slacker way are not the only alternatives.  I use FVWM with
> four desktops with 16 panels each.  Unlike Gnome, FVWM is infinitely
> customizeable and does not have thousands of baffling dependencies.

Be sweet to see a screen grab of that, John. :-)

Re: Replace systemd

[tomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 02:38:23AM -0500, Dave Sherohman wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 07:08:03PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > Why not try a window manager and a panel?
> 
> I'm so far behind the times[1]... What's a "panel" in this context?

This is typically a small area of the screen where you keep icons
for applications, system state displays (battery, speaker, what not)
and other garden gnomes & paraphernalia.

Something giving you the illusion that you are in control.

Cheers
- -- tomás
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAllcneUACgkQBcgs9XrR2kYa3ACfQysVriCBo4pr7uTPOwxbBlBB
ccQAn3suw+YAGKgXkAy18Aha617Y0z7W
=N+q9
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Replace systemd

[Dave Sherohman]

On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 07:08:03PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> Why not try a window manager and a panel?

I'm so far behind the times[1]... What's a "panel" in this context?


[1] I still use WindowMaker for my desktop.

-- 
Dave Sherohman

Re: Replace systemd

[Jimmy Johnson]

On 07/03/2017 01:41 PM, Jim Ohlstein wrote:


Is there a pure Debian alternative?


Have a look at https://devuan.org/.


A couple of hours ago this was Debian Wheezy with the 
kde-plasma-desktop.  Now it's Devuan Jessie and kde-plasma-desktop and 
the only systemd is "libsystemd0" and it seems to be required for kde. 
This is a very smart system and an easy upgrade. I think some of Linux 
best developers are working on Devuan.


Cheers,
--
Jimmy Johnson

Devuan Jessie - KDE 4.14.2 - Intel G3220 - EXT4 at sda16
Registered Linux User #380263

Re: Replace systemd

[Patrick Bartek]

On Tue, 04 Jul 2017 15:35:10 -0700 David Griffith  wrote:

> On July 3, 2017 1:44:30 PM PDT, Martin Read 
> wrote:
> >On 03/07/17 20:42, Rory Campbell-Lange wrote:
> >> Is there a pure Debian alternative?
> >
> >There is an alternative init daemon, in the form of sysvinit
> >(install the package "sysvinit-core" to use this as your init
> >daemon), and there are several solutions for service management.
> >
> 
> It would be nice to have an install-time option for selecting the
> desired init.

I suggested that a few months ago.  Thread lasted a couple weeks.  Lots
of Pro and Con with a few "Too Hard to Do" or "Impossible to Do."

At least, the Debian developers listened and with Stretch gave us the
option to easily switch to either of two other inits without breaking
anything.

B

Re: Replace systemd

[Patrick Bartek]

On Tue, 4 Jul 2017 15:56:06 -0700 Jimmy Johnson
 wrote:

> On 07/04/2017 03:11 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > On Tue, 04 Jul 2017 19:51:39 +0200 deloptes 
> > wrote:
> > 
> >> Christian Seiler wrote:
> >>
> >>> For both Jessie and Stretch, the following holds true:
> >>>
> >>> - GNOME requires systmed-logind's interfaces to work. (Or any
> >>> alternative that implements the same DBus interface, but none
> >>> exist in Debian at the moment)
> >>
> >> + one reason no to use Gnome
> >>
> > 
> > My thoughts exactly.  I stopped using GNOME or any desktop
> > environment 5+ years ago.  Resource hogs..  A window manager, a
> > single panel and a couple virtual terminals are more than
> > sufficient.
> > 
> > B
> 
> Funny, that sounds like something a Slack'er would say. Patrick, we
> are not all keyboard wizards like you and that other Patrick who can 
> keyboard faster than I can read. That's a compliment on your
> abilities by the way.

I'm far from a wizard on the keyboard or a terminal  I'm just as
lazy as the next guy, but I'm also a minimalist.  And a window manager
and a panel is all the GUI I need.   In reality, it's all anybody
needs.  Desktop environments are just so much eye candy, but they get
installed by default and that's what people are used to.  Doesn't
bother me as long as I get to choose the interface I want.

And FWIW, I used Slackware for a couple years a dozen years ago.  But
I've used a lot of Linux distros over the past 17 years as well as the 4
or 5 major desktop environments.

Why not try a window manager and a panel?  It's not that hard to
master.  And your system will be noticeably snappier.  I suggest
starting with Openbox as the manager and LXPanel.  That's what I
use.  If you've got LXDE installed, both are already installed.  Just
choose Openbox at login.  But RTFM first.

B

Re: Replace systemd

[John Hasler]

Jimmy Johnson writes:
> Funny, that sounds like something a Slack'er would say. Patrick, we
> are not all keyboard wizards like you and that other Patrick who can
> keyboard faster than I can read. That's a compliment on your abilities
> by the way.

Gnome or the Slacker way are not the only alternatives.  I use FVWM with
four desktops with 16 panels each.  Unlike Gnome, FVWM is infinitely
customizeable and does not have thousands of baffling dependencies.
-- 
John Hasler 
jhas...@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

Re: Replace systemd

[Jimmy Johnson]

On 07/04/2017 03:11 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:

On Tue, 04 Jul 2017 19:51:39 +0200 deloptes  wrote:


Christian Seiler wrote:


For both Jessie and Stretch, the following holds true:

- GNOME requires systmed-logind's interfaces to work. (Or any
alternative that implements the same DBus interface, but none
exist in Debian at the moment)


+ one reason no to use Gnome



My thoughts exactly.  I stopped using GNOME or any desktop environment
5+ years ago.  Resource hogs..  A window manager, a single panel and a
couple virtual terminals are more than sufficient.

B


Funny, that sounds like something a Slack'er would say. Patrick, we are 
not all keyboard wizards like you and that other Patrick who can 
keyboard faster than I can read. That's a compliment on your abilities 
by the way.

--
Jimmy Johnson

Ubuntu 14.04 LTS - KDE 4.13.2 - Intel G3220 - EXT4 at sda5
Registered Linux User #380263

Re: Replace systemd

[David Griffith]

On July 3, 2017 1:44:30 PM PDT, Martin Read  wrote:
>On 03/07/17 20:42, Rory Campbell-Lange wrote:
>> Is there a pure Debian alternative?
>
>There is an alternative init daemon, in the form of sysvinit (install 
>the package "sysvinit-core" to use this as your init daemon), and there
>are several solutions for service management.
>

It would be nice to have an install-time option for selecting the desired init.
-- 
David Griffith
d...@661.org

Re: Replace systemd

[Patrick Bartek]

On Tue, 04 Jul 2017 19:51:39 +0200 deloptes  wrote:

> Christian Seiler wrote:
> 
> > For both Jessie and Stretch, the following holds true:
> > 
> > - GNOME requires systmed-logind's interfaces to work. (Or any
> > alternative that implements the same DBus interface, but none
> > exist in Debian at the moment)
> 
> + one reason no to use Gnome
> 

My thoughts exactly.  I stopped using GNOME or any desktop environment
5+ years ago.  Resource hogs..  A window manager, a single panel and a
couple virtual terminals are more than sufficient.

B

Re: Replace systemd

[deloptes]

Christian Seiler wrote:

> For both Jessie and Stretch, the following holds true:
> 
> - GNOME requires systmed-logind's interfaces to work. (Or any
> alternative that implements the same DBus interface, but none
> exist in Debian at the moment)

+ one reason no to use Gnome

Re: Replace systemd

[Christian Seiler]

Hi,

On 07/04/2017 02:06 AM, Jason Wittlin-Cohen wrote:
> I assume this will work fine for a server system, but will it work on
> a desktop system using GNOME? From what I've read, GNOME has several
> systemd dependencies, but it's not clear to me whether this requires
> systemd to be used as init, or merely that systemd's packages must be
> installed.

For both Jessie and Stretch, the following holds true:

 - GNOME requires systmed-logind's interfaces to work. (Or any
   alternative that implements the same DBus interface, but none
   exist in Debian at the moment)

 - systemd-logind is part of the 'systemd' package, that must be
   instaled.

 - systemd-logind requires DBus methods of systemd, so you will
   either need systemd running ss init system (the 'systemd-sysv'
   package) _OR_ an alternative implementation of these interfaces
   to make logind work on non-systemd systems

 - the 'systemd-shim' package provides an alternative
   implementation of the interfaces required by systemd-logind
   so that it may be used on non-systemd systems

 - this means that you can indeed run GNOME without systemd as
   the init system (i.e. without the 'systemd-sysv' package) on
   Jessie and Stretch, if you have both the 'systemd' and
   'systemd-shim' packages installed

 - however, there will be some slight degradation in some corner
   cases of functionality

For the future (Buster and onwards), note that this all hinges
on systemd-shim continuing to implement the required interfaces
to make systemd-logind work _or_ someone writing and packaging
and alternative to systemd-logind that provides the same DBus
interfaces. It is currently not completely clear whether either
of these is going to happen: there is no alternative to logind
packaged (I know some people have been working on an alternative
that implements the same DBus interfaces, but I don't know the
status of that) and systemd-shim is currently an orphaned
package (both upstream and in Debian), so it's unclear how well
supported this is going to remain. (Of course, if there are no
significant changes between how systemd and logind talk to each
other, this might not be an issue at all, because stuff that
currently works will continue working.)

Regards,
Christian

Re: Replace systemd

[Jason Wittlin-Cohen]

I assume this will work fine for a server system, but will it work on a
desktop system using GNOME?  From what I've read, GNOME has several systemd
dependencies, but it's not clear to me whether this requires systemd to be
used as init, or merely that systemd's packages must be installed.

Also, the future of sysvinit in Debian is not clear.  I've done some
research and one particular Debian developer claims that there is no plan
to support sysvinit as of Stretch, declaring that systemd is the only
option as of Stretch [1].  However, a different source [2] indicates that
there are several developers maintaining sysvinit currently.

[1]
https://www.reddit.com/r/debian/comments/3x8ef1/what_is_the_status_of_init_independency_in_stretch/cy2olz2/
[2] http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Debian_Stretch

On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Greg Wooledge  wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 08:42:11PM +0100, Rory Campbell-Lange wrote:
> > Simply put; systemd doesn't suit me. Its a bit like being asked to use
> > an graphical editor instead of vi. Or being forced to use Windows. My
> > laptop doesn't feel like my machine anymore.
> >
> > Is there a pure Debian alternative?
>
> You may switch to one of the other init systems.  Assuming stretch
> (Debian 9):
>
> To use sysvinit, simply "apt-get install sysvinit-core" and reboot.
>
> To use runit, "apt-get install runit-systemd", reboot, "apt-get install
> runit-init", and reboot again.
>
>

Re: Replace systemd

[Patrick Bartek]

On Mon, 3 Jul 2017 16:39:26 -0400 Greg Wooledge 
wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 08:42:11PM +0100, Rory Campbell-Lange wrote:
> > Simply put; systemd doesn't suit me. Its a bit like being asked to
> > use an graphical editor instead of vi. Or being forced to use
> > Windows. My laptop doesn't feel like my machine anymore.
> > 
> > Is there a pure Debian alternative?
> 
> You may switch to one of the other init systems.  Assuming stretch
> (Debian 9):
> 
> To use sysvinit, simply "apt-get install sysvinit-core" and reboot.
> 
> To use runit, "apt-get install runit-systemd", reboot, "apt-get
> install runit-init", and reboot again.
> 

I can verify both these work.  I've been running two versions of
Stretch in VirtualBox on a Wheezy host.  No problems.  I even added
runit supervision to the sysvinit one, and it works without problems.
Didn't remove anything systemd.  Just left it for dependenies.  Both
new inits survive update/upgrades even if systemd components are
upgraded.

B

Re: Replace systemd

[Michael Fothergill]

On 3 July 2017 at 21:39, Greg Wooledge  wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 08:42:11PM +0100, Rory Campbell-Lange wrote:
> > Simply put; systemd doesn't suit me. Its a bit like being asked to use
> > an graphical editor instead of vi. Or being forced to use Windows. My
> > laptop doesn't feel like my machine anymore.
> >
> > Is there a pure Debian alternative?
>
> You may switch to one of the other init systems.  Assuming stretch
> (Debian 9):
>
> To use sysvinit, simply "apt-get install sysvinit-core" and reboot.
>

​I am greatly humbled by the serene unflappable way that you made this
suggestion..

As the Buddha said:

Greater in battle than the man who would conquer a thousand-thousand men,
is he who would conquer just one —
himself.
​
​Would that I could learn to walk in such company.

MF​



> To use runit, "apt-get install runit-systemd", reboot, "apt-get install
> runit-init", and reboot again.
>
>

Re: Replace systemd

[Martin Read]

On 03/07/17 20:42, Rory Campbell-Lange wrote:

Is there a pure Debian alternative?


There is an alternative init daemon, in the form of sysvinit (install 
the package "sysvinit-core" to use this as your init daemon), and there 
are several solutions for service management.


(I might humbly suggest, in passing, that your choice of Subject: header 
is unnecessarily inflammatory and the interrogative "How do I replace 
systemd?" would have been much better than the imperative "Replace 
systemd" :)

Re: Replace systemd

[Dejan Jocic]

On 03-07-17, Rory Campbell-Lange wrote:
> I run Debian on my laptops and several servers.
> 
> On my laptop I've had several recent occasions when it has been irksome
> to try and find the cause of a service not starting or shutting down,
> and I've concluded that I'd like to move away from systemd as I don't
> like the binary log.
> 
> This isn't a conceptual/design issue as I don't know enough of init
> fundamentals to make an informed judgement. It also isn't related to the
> recent Slashdot article about DNS crashes and root privs escalation.
> https://it.slashdot.org/story/17/07/03/0343258/severe-systemd-bug-allowed-remote-code-execution-for-two-years
> or the (possibly incorrectly reported) statements by Lennart Poettering
> noted at "What are the pros/cons of Upstart and systemd?"
> https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/5877/what-are-the-pros-cons-of-upstart-and-systemd
> 
> I additionally find the configuration and documentation off-putting.
> These are trivial points, but the classic /etc config files seem to be
> being replaced with ini style files with non-explicit defaults. The
> documentation is wordy and also sometimes obtuse. e.g. "To disable a
> configuration file supplied by the vendor, the recommended way is to
> place a symlink to /dev/null in the configuration directory" and
> repeated references to "vendors" (which is almost certainly the wrong
> word).
> 
> Simply put; systemd doesn't suit me. Its a bit like being asked to use
> an graphical editor instead of vi. Or being forced to use Windows. My
> laptop doesn't feel like my machine anymore.
> 
> Is there a pure Debian alternative?
> 
> Thanks
> Rory
> 

You can still use Debian without systemd as init. Explained here:

https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/05/msg00538.html

If you would prefer that it is some derivate/fork of Debian without
systemd, I do not have personal experience with those, but I'm sure that
you will get few hints.

Re: Replace systemd

[Jim Ohlstein]

Hello,

On 07/03/2017 03:42 PM, Rory Campbell-Lange wrote:
> I run Debian on my laptops and several servers.
> 
> On my laptop I've had several recent occasions when it has been irksome
> to try and find the cause of a service not starting or shutting down,
> and I've concluded that I'd like to move away from systemd as I don't
> like the binary log.
> 
> This isn't a conceptual/design issue as I don't know enough of init
> fundamentals to make an informed judgement. It also isn't related to the
> recent Slashdot article about DNS crashes and root privs escalation.
> https://it.slashdot.org/story/17/07/03/0343258/severe-systemd-bug-allowed-remote-code-execution-for-two-years
> or the (possibly incorrectly reported) statements by Lennart Poettering
> noted at "What are the pros/cons of Upstart and systemd?"
> https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/5877/what-are-the-pros-cons-of-upstart-and-systemd
> 
> I additionally find the configuration and documentation off-putting.
> These are trivial points, but the classic /etc config files seem to be
> being replaced with ini style files with non-explicit defaults. The
> documentation is wordy and also sometimes obtuse. e.g. "To disable a
> configuration file supplied by the vendor, the recommended way is to
> place a symlink to /dev/null in the configuration directory" and
> repeated references to "vendors" (which is almost certainly the wrong
> word).
> 
> Simply put; systemd doesn't suit me. Its a bit like being asked to use
> an graphical editor instead of vi. Or being forced to use Windows. My
> laptop doesn't feel like my machine anymore.
> 
> Is there a pure Debian alternative?

Have a look at https://devuan.org/.


-- 
Jim Ohlstein
Professional Mailman Hosting
https://mailman-hosting.com



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Replace systemd

[Greg Wooledge]

On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 08:42:11PM +0100, Rory Campbell-Lange wrote:
> Simply put; systemd doesn't suit me. Its a bit like being asked to use
> an graphical editor instead of vi. Or being forced to use Windows. My
> laptop doesn't feel like my machine anymore.
> 
> Is there a pure Debian alternative?

You may switch to one of the other init systems.  Assuming stretch
(Debian 9):

To use sysvinit, simply "apt-get install sysvinit-core" and reboot.

To use runit, "apt-get install runit-systemd", reboot, "apt-get install
runit-init", and reboot again.

Replace systemd

[Rory Campbell-Lange]

I run Debian on my laptops and several servers.

On my laptop I've had several recent occasions when it has been irksome
to try and find the cause of a service not starting or shutting down,
and I've concluded that I'd like to move away from systemd as I don't
like the binary log.

This isn't a conceptual/design issue as I don't know enough of init
fundamentals to make an informed judgement. It also isn't related to the
recent Slashdot article about DNS crashes and root privs escalation.
https://it.slashdot.org/story/17/07/03/0343258/severe-systemd-bug-allowed-remote-code-execution-for-two-years
or the (possibly incorrectly reported) statements by Lennart Poettering
noted at "What are the pros/cons of Upstart and systemd?"
https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/5877/what-are-the-pros-cons-of-upstart-and-systemd

I additionally find the configuration and documentation off-putting.
These are trivial points, but the classic /etc config files seem to be
being replaced with ini style files with non-explicit defaults. The
documentation is wordy and also sometimes obtuse. e.g. "To disable a
configuration file supplied by the vendor, the recommended way is to
place a symlink to /dev/null in the configuration directory" and
repeated references to "vendors" (which is almost certainly the wrong
word).

Simply put; systemd doesn't suit me. Its a bit like being asked to use
an graphical editor instead of vi. Or being forced to use Windows. My
laptop doesn't feel like my machine anymore.

Is there a pure Debian alternative?

Thanks
Rory

Replace Systemd on Jessie

[basti]

Hello,
weeks ago someone write an Howto, Replace Systemd on Jessie with Sysinit.
Perhaps it was Dan Ritter?
I cant find this mail anymore, can somebody help please?

Regards,
Basti


-- 
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/544662a4.3010...@arcor.de

Re: Replace Systemd on Jessie

[Dan Ritter]

On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 03:41:56PM +0200, basti wrote:
 Hello,
 weeks ago someone write an Howto, Replace Systemd on Jessie with Sysinit.
 Perhaps it was Dan Ritter?
 I cant find this mail anymore, can somebody help please?
 

https://randomstring.org/blog/blog/2014/10/14/removing-systemd-from-a-debian-jessie-system/


-dsr-


-- 
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/20141021143424.ge2...@randomstring.org

Re: Replace Systemd on Jessie

[Brian]

On Tue 21 Oct 2014 at 15:41:56 +0200, basti wrote:

 weeks ago someone write an Howto, Replace Systemd on Jessie with Sysinit.
 Perhaps it was Dan Ritter?
 I cant find this mail anymore, can somebody help please?

https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2014/09/msg00969.html

The first step of installing sysv-rc and sysvinit doesn't do any harm
but it does not do any good either because both these packages are
already installed. The correction does not appear to have made it to
the web page you have been given.


-- 
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/20141021170316.gr23...@copernicus.demon.co.uk

Re: Replace Systemd on Jessie

[debian]

On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 03:41:56PM +0200, basti wrote:
 Hello,
 weeks ago someone write an Howto, Replace Systemd on Jessie with Sysinit.
 Perhaps it was Dan Ritter?
 I cant find this mail anymore, can somebody help please?
 
 Regards,
 Basti

Hi Basti,

maybe this one can help you - 
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2014/10/msg00659.html

Regards,
Asen


-- 
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/20141022020855.GA3825@debian.domain.local

Re: Replace Systemd on Jessie

[Martinx - ジェームズ]

Just do:

apt-get install sysvinit-core

That's it.

On 21 October 2014 11:41, basti black.flederm...@arcor.de wrote:
 Hello,
 weeks ago someone write an Howto, Replace Systemd on Jessie with Sysinit.
 Perhaps it was Dan Ritter?
 I cant find this mail anymore, can somebody help please?

 Regards,
 Basti


 --
 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/544662a4.3010...@arcor.de



-- 
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/cajsm8j1zkmg9kuyyc6bjbygczuk4n685dv7g-pld6kej62c...@mail.gmail.com