Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Lisi Reisz]

On Saturday 17 October 2015 00:39:18 tom arnall wrote:
> what prevents Debian from providing an alternate boot option in Jessie
> which does not use systemd? My Wheezy system seems to do this.

Nothing.  It provides one.

Lisi

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Lisi Reisz]

On Saturday 17 October 2015 01:33:42 David Wright wrote:
> Quoting tom arnall (kloro2...@gmail.com):
> > what prevents Debian from providing an alternate boot option in Jessie
> > which does not use systemd? My Wheezy system seems to do this.
>
> (Yes, this is the correct thread for this question.)
>
> Wheezy had systemd included as a "technology preview".
> I don't think Debian does technology retrospectives.

It does provide an alternative option.

https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=sysvinit=names=stable=all
https://packages.debian.org/search?suite=stable=all=any=names=upstart

I didn't search for anything else.

Lisi

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[tom arnall]

what prevents Debian from providing an alternate boot option in Jessie
which does not use systemd? My Wheezy system seems to do this.

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[David Wright]

Quoting tom arnall (kloro2...@gmail.com):
> what prevents Debian from providing an alternate boot option in Jessie
> which does not use systemd? My Wheezy system seems to do this.

(Yes, this is the correct thread for this question.)

Wheezy had systemd included as a "technology preview".
I don't think Debian does technology retrospectives.

Cheers,
David.

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Dan Ritter]

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 10:47:48PM +0200, Arno Schuring wrote:
> 
> > Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 22:26:53 +0200
> > From: geo...@nsup.org
> >
> > Le tridi 23 vendémiaire, an CCXXIV, Arno Schuring a écrit :
> >> It's been years since I've seen a system where the OS boot took longer
> >> than the BIOS boot. Linux or Windows alike.
> >
> > You may have noticed that the operator between the time for the POST and the
> > time for the OS boot is +, not max().
> 
> Of course. But when your BIOS boot time is 15 seconds, it hardly makes
> any difference if your OS boots in 3 seconds or in 2.1 seconds, does it?

It can take our hardware RAID cards upwards of five minutes. We
reboot about once a month for kernel upgrades; several months if
we're lucky.

Meanwhile, a Wheezy desktop with a cheap SSD boots from cold to
usable in less than 19 seconds, which is less than the 30
seconds it takes a TCP session to consider timing out.

-dsr-

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Mart van de Wege]

Alex Moonshine  writes:

> On Wed, 14 Oct 2015 07:49:08 -0500
> Richard Owlett  wrote:
>
>> What has the end-user, with a single machine, gained today from 
>> the adoption of systemd?
>
> Speaking for myself:
> 1. It took me an hour of googling to write my own working init script.
> It takes me 10 minutes to write my own systemd unit.
> 2. Boot times improved.
>
Autostarting programs on login is a lot simpler now, and unified across
desktop environments; I'm no longer dependent on the capabilities of the
session manager, and I can even autostart programs I need when logging in
on the console.

In my case, having a running emacs server is indispensable, so I wrote a
systemd user service unit.

Mart

-- 
"We will need a longer wall when the revolution comes."
--- AJS, quoting an uncertain source.

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Joel Rees]

You say potato, I say, potato, ...

On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 2:56 PM, Mart van de Wege  wrote:
> Alex Moonshine  writes:
>
>> On Wed, 14 Oct 2015 07:49:08 -0500
>> Richard Owlett  wrote:
>>
>>> What has the end-user, with a single machine, gained today from
>>> the adoption of systemd?
>>
>> Speaking for myself:
>> 1. It took me an hour of googling to write my own working init script.

It takes me varying amounts of time, depending on how much I remember
of the last time I did a particular type of script on a particular OS.

>> It takes me 10 minutes to write my own systemd unit.

For me, systemd only adds one more layer of complexity.

>> 2. Boot times improved.

Since I don't force my file systems to be unified, boot times
sometimes shoot to near infinity. (The dreaded ctrl-d, which the
systemd cabal punted on. At least, now I know not to play with that.)

> Autostarting programs on login is a lot simpler now, and unified across

Simplified according to whose definition of simple?

Not mine.

> desktop environments; I'm no longer dependent on the capabilities of the
> session manager, and I can even autostart programs I need when logging in
> on the console.

My guess is that you are now dependent, not only on the session
manager, but on systemd's handling the sesion manager properly as your
proxy. Which is just fine for you, as long as the systemd cabal is
channelling your techniques. (Or is it, as long as you are cannelling
their current favorite techniques?)

> In my case, having a running emacs server is indispensable, so I wrote a
> systemd user service unit.

emacs.

:)

I gave up trying to channel RMS and his buddies on
control-esc-whatever sequences. I understand that the control key is
effectively a pseudo-command-mode switch, but I'm comfortable with not
having to hold the switch down. (esc-colon-command).

And I don't have emacs doing shell stuff for me. I guess I'm more
comfortable with using more mnemonic names for my one-offs (perl,
python, gforth, whatever I've been playing with recently when the
shell itself isn't enough.)

Puh-taw-toe, puh-tay-toe.

> Mart
>
> --
> "We will need a longer wall when the revolution comes."
> --- AJS, quoting an uncertain source.
>

-- 
Joel Rees

Be careful when you look at conspiracy.
Arm yourself with knowledge of yourself, as well:
http://reiisi.blogspot.jp/2011/10/conspiracy-theories.html

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Lisi Reisz]

On Wednesday 14 October 2015 13:49:08 Richard Owlett wrote:
> Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > tom arnall  writes:
> >>[SNIP]
> >>
> >> what did they do to poll the views of the user community on the
> >> question?
> >
> > If you want to know how Debian's technical committee came to choose
> > systemd as the default init, see [2].
> >
> >[2] 
>
> That page explicitly answers "How?" [with a emphasis perhaps on
> the mechanics on how the formal side of the Debian community works].
>
> An underlying incompletely answered question is "Why?"
> There have been partial answers written by and for geeks.
> What has the end-user, with a single machine, gained today from
> the adoption of systemd?

Far faster boot up and shut down times.  And it does seem to be much faster.

> During the furor I tried chasing down links by systemd
> proponents. All I found were descriptions of how it made life
> easier for developers and those administering multi-user systems.

Most of the furor I have seen has been the complete opposite.  Developers and 
systems administrators complaining that systemd made life harder.

Please note that I am not saying that all administrators and developers said 
that.  Merely that most of those complaining at least claim to be 
administrators etc., and claim that systemd is only really an advantage to 
the single desktop user.

Lisi

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Lisi Reisz]

On Wednesday 14 October 2015 10:33:48 to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> That depends on your expectations wrt desktop. If you target a fat DE,
> it'll be difficult (for Gnome perhaps nigh impossible dunno).

I understood that Gnome3 depends on systemd.

Lisi

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Richard Owlett]

Lisi Reisz wrote:

On Wednesday 14 October 2015 13:49:08 Richard Owlett wrote:

Ansgar Burchardt wrote:

Hi,

tom arnall  writes:

[SNIP]

what did they do to poll the views of the user community on the
question?


If you want to know how Debian's technical committee came to choose
systemd as the default init, see [2].

[2] 


That page explicitly answers "How?" [with a emphasis perhaps on
the mechanics on how the formal side of the Debian community works].

An underlying incompletely answered question is "Why?"
There have been partial answers written by and for geeks.
What has the end-user, with a single machine, gained today from
the adoption of systemd?


Far faster boot up and shut down times.  And it does seem to be much faster.


During the furor I tried chasing down links by systemd
proponents. All I found were descriptions of how it made life
easier for developers and those administering multi-user systems.


Most of the furor I have seen has been the complete opposite.  Developers and
systems administrators complaining that systemd made life harder.



I was restricting my search to PROponents of systemd. IOW I was 
looking for a systemd sales-pitch. What I got reminded me of a 
used car salesman I met when shopping for my first car. I'd 
specified I needed a car for urban commuting, he insisted on 
touting its off road capability. Needless to say I never went 
back to that dealer.




Please note that I am not saying that all administrators and developers said
that.  Merely that most of those complaining at least claim to be
administrators etc., and claim that systemd is only really an advantage to
the single desktop user.

Lisi

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Ric Moore]

On 10/14/2015 03:55 AM, tom arnall wrote:

i read the piece on installing  without systemd. i get the feeling
that the bottom line of it is: good luck. or am i missing something?


Yes, you failed to google on month's worth of hundreds of old posts 
concerning this or you just happen to enjoy trolling. :/ Ric

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Joel Rees]

2015/10/15 0:15 "Ric Moore" :
>
> On 10/14/2015 03:55 AM, tom arnall wrote:
>>
>> i read the piece on installing  without systemd. i get the feeling
>> that the bottom line of it is: good luck. or am i missing something?
>
>
> Yes, you failed to google on month's worth of hundreds of old posts
concerning this or you just happen to enjoy trolling. :/ Ric
>

So what did you mean, when you said, no?

That something about the old arrangement would not be available in Jessie?

Joel Rees

Computer memory is just fancy paper,
CPUs just fancy pens.
All is a stream of text
flowing from the past into the future.

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Alex Moonshine]

On Wed, 14 Oct 2015 07:49:08 -0500
Richard Owlett  wrote:

> What has the end-user, with a single machine, gained today from 
> the adoption of systemd?

Speaking for myself:
1. It took me an hour of googling to write my own working init script.
It takes me 10 minutes to write my own systemd unit.
2. Boot times improved.

Other than that, no difference.
-- 
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so.

Best wishes,
Alex S.

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[tomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 07:49:08AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> Ansgar Burchardt wrote:

[...]

> >   [2] 
> >
> 
> That page explicitly answers "How?" [with a emphasis perhaps on the
> mechanics on how the formal side of the Debian community works].
> 
> An underlying incompletely answered question is "Why?"
> There have been partial answers written by and for geeks.
> What has the end-user, with a single machine, gained today from the
> adoption of systemd?
> 
> During the furor I tried chasing down links by systemd proponents.
> All I found were descriptions of how it made life easier for
> developers and those administering multi-user systems.

I think I outed my position on that well enough, but still: do you use
Gnome (perhaps KDE, don't know for sure about this)?

Then you have a "why" too!

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

iEYEARECAAYFAlYeXkMACgkQBcgs9XrR2kb7iwCfS+Qjnqr7Yk4yv6esNpEgBCR3
/Z0AnRzBc4ZqBinlsCsNGHsSNCphfAgy
=ekiy
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Lisi Reisz]

On Wednesday 14 October 2015 17:06:09 Reco wrote:
>   Hi.
>
> On Wed, 14 Oct 2015 15:18:23 +0100
>
> Lisi Reisz  wrote:
> > On Wednesday 14 October 2015 10:33:48 to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > > That depends on your expectations wrt desktop. If you target a fat DE,
> > > it'll be difficult (for Gnome perhaps nigh impossible dunno).
> >
> > I understood that Gnome3 depends on systemd.
>
> That's not correct assumption (as of jessie, at least).

It's not an assumption.  I just understood that that was the case because 
someone had said it.  I do not use it, and don't mind about it, so hadn't 
checked.  The only thing I assumed about Gnome3 was that I wouldn't like it, 
and when I saw it I didn't.

Is it the case in Sid or Stretch?  Question, not assumption.

Lisi

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Reco]

Hi.

On Wed, 14 Oct 2015 15:18:23 +0100
Lisi Reisz  wrote:

> On Wednesday 14 October 2015 10:33:48 to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > That depends on your expectations wrt desktop. If you target a fat DE,
> > it'll be difficult (for Gnome perhaps nigh impossible dunno).
> 
> I understood that Gnome3 depends on systemd.

That's not correct assumption (as of jessie, at least).

GDM3 depends on systemd (or rather, on libpam-systemd).
GNOME3 itself does not (as of jessie, at least).

If GNOME is started via any other display manager other then GDM3 - it
happily works without systemd. And that's the way it should be, IMO, as
there's nothing in GNOME (yet?) to justify such dependency.

Reco

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Reco]

Hi.

On Wed, 14 Oct 2015 17:36:40 +0100
Lisi Reisz  wrote:

> On Wednesday 14 October 2015 17:06:09 Reco wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > On Wed, 14 Oct 2015 15:18:23 +0100
> >
> > Lisi Reisz  wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 14 October 2015 10:33:48 to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > > > That depends on your expectations wrt desktop. If you target a fat DE,
> > > > it'll be difficult (for Gnome perhaps nigh impossible dunno).
> > >
> > > I understood that Gnome3 depends on systemd.
> >
> > That's not correct assumption (as of jessie, at least).
> 
> It's not an assumption.  I just understood that that was the case because 
> someone had said it.  I do not use it, and don't mind about it, so hadn't 
> checked.  The only thing I assumed about Gnome3 was that I wouldn't like it, 
> and when I saw it I didn't.

I quit using Gnome back in '07. But to answer whenever X depends on Y
one does not need to use X or Y. 'apt-cache' or two is usually enough.


> Is it the case in Sid or Stretch?  Question, not assumption.

A quick glance on "gdm3" and "gnome-shell" dependencies shows that
things are the same in current testing and sid as of now.

As you surely know, everything in testing or sid is changing
constantly, so I won't rely on this in the long run if I was you.

Reco

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Joel Rees]

2015/10/14 13:24 "Ric Moore" :
>
> On 10/13/2015 11:20 PM, tom arnall wrote:
>>
>> I am running Wheezy and notice that the boot options include but
>> aren't limited to systemd. Is it possible to have this arrangement
>> with Jessie?
>
>
> No. :) Ric

I tend to be wandering around way out in left field a lot, but

https://wiki.debian.org/systemd#Installing_without_systemd

Also, this is something I just saw:

http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page

Now, I must say, as near as I can tell, there is no escaping from the
influence of the cabal at this point, but is that what the OP was asking?

Joel Rees

Computer memory is just fancy paper,
CPUs just fancy pens.
All is a stream of text
flowing from the past into the future.

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[tom arnall]

i read the piece on installing  without systemd. i get the feeling
that the bottom line of it is: good luck. or am i missing something?

who  decided that Debian shd be locked to systemd?

what did they do to poll the views of the user community on the question?

is it true that Red Hat had a major influence on the Debian decision makers?

from what i've read so far, systemd is still very much in beta at
best. wd people on this list agree with that?


On 10/13/15, Joel Rees  wrote:
> 2015/10/14 13:24 "Ric Moore" :
>>
>> On 10/13/2015 11:20 PM, tom arnall wrote:
>>>
>>> I am running Wheezy and notice that the boot options include but
>>> aren't limited to systemd. Is it possible to have this arrangement
>>> with Jessie?
>>
>>
>> No. :) Ric
>
> I tend to be wandering around way out in left field a lot, but
>
> https://wiki.debian.org/systemd#Installing_without_systemd
>
> Also, this is something I just saw:
>
> http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
>
> Now, I must say, as near as I can tell, there is no escaping from the
> influence of the cabal at this point, but is that what the OP was asking?
>
> Joel Rees
>
> Computer memory is just fancy paper,
> CPUs just fancy pens.
> All is a stream of text
> flowing from the past into the future.
>


-- 
Once its survival is on the line, a species will often find powers
unimaginable in the days of its complacency.





On 10/13/15, Joel Rees  wrote:
> 2015/10/14 13:24 "Ric Moore" :
>>
>> On 10/13/2015 11:20 PM, tom arnall wrote:
>>>
>>> I am running Wheezy and notice that the boot options include but
>>> aren't limited to systemd. Is it possible to have this arrangement
>>> with Jessie?
>>
>>
>> No. :) Ric
>
> I tend to be wandering around way out in left field a lot, but
>
> https://wiki.debian.org/systemd#Installing_without_systemd
>
> Also, this is something I just saw:
>
> http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
>
> Now, I must say, as near as I can tell, there is no escaping from the
> influence of the cabal at this point, but is that what the OP was asking?
>
> Joel Rees
>
> Computer memory is just fancy paper,
> CPUs just fancy pens.
> All is a stream of text
> flowing from the past into the future.
>


-- 
Once its survival is on the line, a species will often find powers
unimaginable in the days of its complacency.

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Ansgar Burchardt]

Hi,

tom arnall  writes:
> i read the piece on installing  without systemd. i get the feeling
> that the bottom line of it is: good luck. or am i missing something?

> On 10/13/15, Joel Rees  wrote:
>> I tend to be wandering around way out in left field a lot, but
>>
>> https://wiki.debian.org/systemd#Installing_without_systemd

The linked note explains how to do the *initial* installation without
systemd which seems a bit complicated. If you want to use some other
init implementation, I would recommend doing a regular install and then
replacing systemd-sysv as described on [1].

  [1] 

> who  decided that Debian shd be locked to systemd?

It's not.

> what did they do to poll the views of the user community on the question?

If you want to know how Debian's technical committee came to choose
systemd as the default init, see [2].

  [2] 

> is it true that Red Hat had a major influence on the Debian decision makers?

No. As far as I know that conspiracy theory is about as true as the
other one about the moon landings being fake. ;)

> from what i've read so far, systemd is still very much in beta at
> best. wd people on this list agree with that?

No.

Ansgar

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Darac Marjal]

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 12:55:36AM -0700, tom arnall wrote:
> i read the piece on installing  without systemd. i get the feeling
> that the bottom line of it is: good luck. or am i missing something?
> 
> who  decided that Debian shd be locked to systemd?

The Debian Technical Committee (tech-ctte) were asked to "vote on and 
decide on the default init system for debian)[1]. Discussion took place 
over five months and votes were cast. The result [2] ended in a tie 
between systemd and upstart. The tie was resolved by the tech-ctte 
Chairman (who was at that time Bdale Garbee), who voted for systemd.

The tech-ctte are empowered by the debian constitution to decide on any 
matter of technical policy, and is composed of Debian Developers (DDs) 
appointed by the Debian Project Leader.

[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=727708
[2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=727708#6729

> 
> what did they do to poll the views of the user community on the question?
>

As noted above, bug #727708 was open for several months, plus there was 
lively debate on both the -devel and -user mailing lists.

> 
> is it true that Red Hat had a major influence on the Debian decision makers?
> 
Perhaps you're referring to 
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=727708#6959
>
> from what i've read so far, systemd is still very much in beta at
> best. wd people on this list agree with that?

That may be the case, but it is already significantly better than SysV 
init. If, as you suggest, it's in beta, then it can only get better with 
everyone's help.

> 
> 
> On 10/13/15, Joel Rees  wrote:
> > 2015/10/14 13:24 "Ric Moore" :
> >>
> >> On 10/13/2015 11:20 PM, tom arnall wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I am running Wheezy and notice that the boot options include but
> >>> aren't limited to systemd. Is it possible to have this arrangement
> >>> with Jessie?
> >>
> >>
> >> No. :) Ric
> >
> > I tend to be wandering around way out in left field a lot, but
> >
> > https://wiki.debian.org/systemd#Installing_without_systemd
> >
> > Also, this is something I just saw:
> >
> > http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
> >
> > Now, I must say, as near as I can tell, there is no escaping from the
> > influence of the cabal at this point, but is that what the OP was asking?
> >
> > Joel Rees
> >
> > Computer memory is just fancy paper,
> > CPUs just fancy pens.
> > All is a stream of text
> > flowing from the past into the future.
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Once its survival is on the line, a species will often find powers
> unimaginable in the days of its complacency.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 10/13/15, Joel Rees  wrote:
> > 2015/10/14 13:24 "Ric Moore" :
> >>
> >> On 10/13/2015 11:20 PM, tom arnall wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I am running Wheezy and notice that the boot options include but
> >>> aren't limited to systemd. Is it possible to have this arrangement
> >>> with Jessie?
> >>
> >>
> >> No. :) Ric
> >
> > I tend to be wandering around way out in left field a lot, but
> >
> > https://wiki.debian.org/systemd#Installing_without_systemd
> >
> > Also, this is something I just saw:
> >
> > http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
> >
> > Now, I must say, as near as I can tell, there is no escaping from the
> > influence of the cabal at this point, but is that what the OP was asking?
> >
> > Joel Rees
> >
> > Computer memory is just fancy paper,
> > CPUs just fancy pens.
> > All is a stream of text
> > flowing from the past into the future.
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Once its survival is on the line, a species will often find powers
> unimaginable in the days of its complacency.
> 

-- 
For more information, please reread.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Liam O'Toole]

On 2015-10-14, tom arnall  wrote:
> i read the piece on installing  without systemd. i get the feeling
> that the bottom line of it is: good luck. or am i missing something?
>
> who  decided that Debian shd be locked to systemd?
>
> what did they do to poll the views of the user community on the question?
>
> is it true that Red Hat had a major influence on the Debian decision makers?
>
> from what i've read so far, systemd is still very much in beta at
> best. wd people on this list agree with that?

The subject has already been debated to hell and back on this and other
lists. Please, not again.

Liam

>
>
> On 10/13/15, Joel Rees  wrote:
>> 2015/10/14 13:24 "Ric Moore" :
>>>
>>> On 10/13/2015 11:20 PM, tom arnall wrote:

 I am running Wheezy and notice that the boot options include but
 aren't limited to systemd. Is it possible to have this arrangement
 with Jessie?
>>>
>>>
>>> No. :) Ric
>>
>> I tend to be wandering around way out in left field a lot, but
>>
>> https://wiki.debian.org/systemd#Installing_without_systemd
>>
>> Also, this is something I just saw:
>>
>> http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
>>
>> Now, I must say, as near as I can tell, there is no escaping from the
>> influence of the cabal at this point, but is that what the OP was asking?
>>
>> Joel Rees
>>
>> Computer memory is just fancy paper,
>> CPUs just fancy pens.
>> All is a stream of text
>> flowing from the past into the future.
>>
>
>

RE: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Arno Schuring]

> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 17:05:16 +0300
> From: moonsh...@openmailbox.org
>
> On Wed, 14 Oct 2015 07:49:08 -0500
> Richard Owlett  wrote:
>
>> What has the end-user, with a single machine, gained today from
>> the adoption of systemd?
>
> Speaking for myself:
> 1. It took me an hour of googling to write my own working init script.
> It takes me 10 minutes to write my own systemd unit.

The last time I wrote an init script:

- copy /etc/init.d/skeleton
- edit the DAEMON= and DESC= lines


> 2. Boot times improved.

It's been years since I've seen a system where the OS boot took longer
than the BIOS boot. Linux or Windows alike.


As additional anecdata: my systems  consistently boot to
systemd-rescue mode whenever I try systemd. This is because I make
heavy use of auto-unlockable encrypted volumes, and systemd doesn't
support auto-unlocking. I finally got around to moving all my unlock
scripts to the initramfs, only to find that the effort was futile:
even if a volume is already unlocked, systemd drops to a rescue
shell. Immediately typing 'exit' in the rescue shell boots the system
to completion without further errors.

Well, not a problem, right? Systemd was said to be modular, so I'll
just uninstall the systemd cryptsetup component. Har har.

So for all of my systems, systemd doesn't even work. I hope you
understand I don't care about boot time when the boot is unsuccesful.


Regards,
Arno

  

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Nicolas George]

Le tridi 23 vendémiaire, an CCXXIV, Arno Schuring a écrit :
> It's been years since I've seen a system where the OS boot took longer
> than the BIOS boot. Linux or Windows alike.

You may have noticed that the operator between the time for the POST and the
time for the OS boot is +, not max().

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Alex Moonshine]

On Wed, 14 Oct 2015 21:51:17 +0200
Arno Schuring  wrote:

> The last time I wrote an init script:
> 
> - copy /etc/init.d/skeleton
> - edit the DAEMON= and DESC= lines

I'll be completely honest, I just never understood sysvinit. I'm
alright with bsd-style Slackware single-rc.d-folder layout, where all
the actual scripts are and you just chmod +x them to enable/disable.
Sysv layout just confuses the hell out of me with all different folders
for each runlevel, symlinks instead of actual scripts, those weird
prefixes (S01, K01, what is this?). I always felt too intimidated by
all that to try and figure out how it all works.
Now I happily don't have to, systemd somehow was easier for me to
understand. But to each his own.


> > 2. Boot times improved.  
> 
> It's been years since I've seen a system where the OS boot took longer
> than the BIOS boot. Linux or Windows alike.

Maybe you use SSDs, I don't know.
My main desktop is a fairly modern machine (core i5, z77 chipset, 8 gb
ram) 
BIOS to grub > 4-5 seconds
grub to login screen with sysvinit ~ 12-14 seconds, with systemd ~ 5-7
seconds. I've never in my life seen any OS load in 2-3 seconds.

> So for all of my systems, systemd doesn't even work. I hope you
> understand I don't care about boot time when the boot is unsuccesful.
> 

Fair enough. It works for all 4 of my systems where I have it. The one
where I have init (Slackware, the single-rc.d-folder one) works too.
Everything works :)

-- 
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so.

Best wishes,
Alex S.

RE: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Arno Schuring]

> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 22:26:53 +0200
> From: geo...@nsup.org
>
> Le tridi 23 vendémiaire, an CCXXIV, Arno Schuring a écrit :
>> It's been years since I've seen a system where the OS boot took longer
>> than the BIOS boot. Linux or Windows alike.
>
> You may have noticed that the operator between the time for the POST and the
> time for the OS boot is +, not max().

Of course. But when your BIOS boot time is 15 seconds, it hardly makes
any difference if your OS boots in 3 seconds or in 2.1 seconds, does it?


Regards,
Arno

  

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Nicolas George]

Le tridi 23 vendémiaire, an CCXXIV, Arno Schuring a écrit :
> Of course. But when your BIOS boot time is 15 seconds, it hardly makes
> any difference if your OS boots in 3 seconds or in 2.1 seconds, does it?

Five percent: small but not negligible. For low-end laptops, the difference
is more significant, I experience it every day. Not even mentioning the
shutdown time.

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[tomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 12:55:36AM -0700, tom arnall wrote:
> i read the piece on installing  without systemd. i get the feeling
> that the bottom line of it is: good luck. or am i missing something?

That depends on your expectations wrt desktop. If you target a fat DE,
it'll be difficult (for Gnome perhaps nigh impossible dunno).

If you just need a window manager, then it'll turn out as fairly easy.

> who  decided that Debian shd be locked to systemd?

It was a pretty intense fight. Where were you at that time? At the
end, the Debian Technical Committee decided systemd to be the default
init system. Many didn't like that decision, but it wasn't taken
lightly.

> what did they do to poll the views of the user community on the question?

Come on. I strongly dislike systemd myself, and my Debian boxes will
be systemd-less, but still: there was discssion. A lot of it. You
may dislike the outcome. I may dislike it. But nobody can say things
went through in secret.

> is it true that Red Hat had a major influence on the Debian decision makers?

In a way, yes -- but mostly it was the big upstream packages (e.g.
Gnome) tying closely to systemd services. Debian would have had to
ditch Gnome as default DE, or maintain a systemd-less fork of
Gnome. And other DEs are jumping on that train too (for whatever
reasons. Ask them, not me).

> from what i've read so far, systemd is still very much in beta at
> best. wd people on this list agree with that?

That will depend on whom you ask. 

Note that this has been very traumatic. Best to avoid drama, whichever
"side" you are on. Be nice and polite to the other "side" -- they are
doing free software as you are, after all.

*If* you care about alternatives to systemd within Debian, then please
*do something about it*. Besides the above mentioned page, which is
IMHO pretty good (if somewhat short on details), there's Devuan, there's
Thorsten Glaser , there's
a set of slides by Axel Beckert .

Do something. But leave personal attacks out of it. Pretty please. We've
had too much of that (in both directions).

Thanks for listening to my soapbox :-)

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

iEYEARECAAYFAlYeIXwACgkQBcgs9XrR2kaKPwCcDs3AaGq6IMgmWJxhXOGqkMYE
ndoAnj3NnS66R45C5AbQIDTti1gXm/1g
=9ths
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Alex Moonshine]

On Wed, 14 Oct 2015 00:55:36 -0700
tom arnall  wrote:

> i read the piece on installing  without systemd. i get the feeling
> that the bottom line of it is: good luck. or am i missing something?

http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/How_to_remove_systemd_from_a_Debian_jessie/sid_installation
this should do the trick for you. Or Devuan.


> who  decided that Debian shd be locked to systemd?

Technical Committee. There was a lot of drama, mind you.
 
> what did they do to poll the views of the user community on the
> question?

What do you imagine they could do?

> is it true that Red Hat had a major influence on the Debian decision
> makers?

Is it true that people like to invent conspiracy theories about
something they know nothing about? 

> from what i've read so far, systemd is still very much in beta at
> best. wd people on this list agree with that?

Try it for yourself. It won't bite you or infect you with AIDS. Then
decide if it is "pretty much beta". I've been using systemd for >2
years on Sid and I'm happy with it.

-- 
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so.

Best wishes,
Alex S.

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Richard Owlett]

Ansgar Burchardt wrote:

Hi,

tom arnall  writes:

[SNIP]



what did they do to poll the views of the user community on the question?


If you want to know how Debian's technical committee came to choose
systemd as the default init, see [2].

   [2] 



That page explicitly answers "How?" [with a emphasis perhaps on 
the mechanics on how the formal side of the Debian community works].


An underlying incompletely answered question is "Why?"
There have been partial answers written by and for geeks.
What has the end-user, with a single machine, gained today from 
the adoption of systemd?


During the furor I tried chasing down links by systemd 
proponents. All I found were descriptions of how it made life 
easier for developers and those administering multi-user systems.

systemd alternative for Jessie?

[tom arnall]

I am running Wheezy and notice that the boot options include but
aren't limited to systemd. Is it possible to have this arrangement
with Jessie?

Re: systemd alternative for Jessie?

[Ric Moore]

On 10/13/2015 11:20 PM, tom arnall wrote:

I am running Wheezy and notice that the boot options include but
aren't limited to systemd. Is it possible to have this arrangement
with Jessie?


No. :) Ric