Re: Plan B for kfreebsd
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi Steven, On 10/11/2014 10:15 AM, Steven Chamberlain wrote: > Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: >> We discussed kfreebsd at length, but are not satisfied that a >> release with Jessie will be of sufficient quality. We are dropping >> it as an official release architecture, Thank you for all your enthusiasm and support of kFreeBSD. However, it looks like Linux as we know it is at a crossroad -- it will be "Lennart Poettering Linux" or something else that something else looks like it will have to be FreeBSD direct now. Debian kFreeBSD looks dead in the water and that won't change whilst so many DDs are so pro systemd -- I think that systemd was the final nail in the coffin. So sad that Debian is no longer going to be the universal Linux and that kFreeBSD is to suffer the consequences of the ... at best, controversial, systemd decision by the TC ... :( A. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) iF4EAREIAAYFAlRgY7MACgkQqBZry7fv4vu5sQEAujpbTZxDz7cSSk64z2QvOkqV mrkpYSBFHfZl+0pUZAAA/0uli8Ecr3QliKTKyg+Nxv9Bdo5G3o+MeHE/jIqKma/h =yQUp -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/546063b5.5030...@affinityvision.com.au
"Lennart Poettering Linux" -- some real eye openers here ... don't be blindsided!
Forwarding a message "as is" from another mailing list ... very relevant to Linux and the systemd dilemma. begin forward... http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-May/019657.html On Fri, 30.05.14 04:32, Michael Biebl (mbiebl at gmail.com) wrote: > > 2014-05-30 4:26 GMT+02:00 Greg KH : > > > You update systemd but you don't update the kernel? How does that make > > any sense? > > There might be very valid reasons why you need to stick with the old > kernel. As said, one example could be that the new one simply doesn't > boot. Requiring lock-step upgrades makes the system less > fault-tolerant. > So where possible this should be avoided. To make this clear, we expect that systemd and kernels are updated in lockstep. We explicitly do not support really old kernels with really new systemd. So far we had the focus to support up to 2y old kernels (which means 3.4 right now), but even that should be taken with a grain of salt, as we already made clear that soon after kdbus is merged into the kernel we'll probably make a hard requirement on it from the systemd side. I am tempted to say that we should merge the firmware loader removal patch at the same time as the kdbus requirement is made. As that would be a clean cut anyway... Also note that at that point we intend to move udev onto kdbus as transport, and get rid of the userspace-to-userspace netlink-based tranport udev used so far. Unless the systemd-haters prepare another kdbus userspace until then this will effectively also mean that we will not support non-systemd systems with udev anymore starting at that point. Gentoo folks, this is your wakeup call. Lennart Poettering, Red Hat --- According to that logic, Linux is Linux+udev+kdbus+systemd .. In tone it is pure bullying. "I have taken udev and it will not work without systemd and I don't care about anything else". I don't think it fits in a GNU/Linux community project like Debian. It is not collaborative at all. It is good for a company like Red Hat to have "our ecosystem everywhere" but not for the rest. Lock-step is good for attackers. If I update X I better update Y and update Z too. oh, I don't know. Maybe don't update. And I do not need Z's functionality but I better do it all.. It is not good for embedded systems if the dependencies are many, become circular and hard to understand. The NSA will love it. Linux will work as long as you use it the way Poettering and Red Hat wants you to use it. Well, I have as much interest in it as using Windows or Mac OS X;-) BTW: People are mangling init(8) and sysV init in the discussion. You can run init and then comes inittab, rc.conf, /etc/rc to change between run levels and than /etc/init.d/*. You can change all that and it does not hurt a bit;-) Regards Peter ___ luv-talk mailing list luv-t...@luv.asn.au http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-talk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/546053c0.5050...@affinityvision.com.au
Re: Can you all please stop?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 1/11/2014 4:20 AM, Russ Allbery wrote: > I find this "giving in" language mystifying. Have you bought into this > idea that there's some sort of marketing campaign? Because as near as I > can tell that's a conspiracy theory for which I see little support. As > one of the people who debated this originally on the TC, I can tell you > that I got precisely *zero* marketing, or even contact, from systemd > developers except where I explicitly reached out and asked questions about > things I was curious about. I also have absolutely no affiliation with > any of these shadowy corporations that people think are running some sort > of long con on the free software community. Well if systemd was JUST an init system then it wouldn't be as significant, but it is much more than that today and endeavours to be much more again. I don't agree that systemd solves problems with sysvinit -- rather it tries to solve all other problems that sysvinit had nothing to do with. There's nothing hard or complicated about a well defined startup procedure via sysvinit, it's very standard and very easy to understand. The /easy/ way is to go with the flow of Linux communities in general, despite the fact that systemd is far over reaching already. Ubuntu was dead against systemd, but they have since relented due to the TC decision ... they are going with the flow, hence the /easy/ way forward. I don't see the need for upstart, systemd or any other /modern/ system to replace sysvinit. I do see the need to fix areas of Linux usability OUTSIDE the init system, but not with systemd. A. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) iF4EAREIAAYFAlRT0X8ACgkQqBZry7fv4vvpGQD/VNDZWq+0O0h9pptPkM+bD1KW GswuBd4mnsONOUQKniIBAMIAkZIcQPRxYRdJ7rllZoHgIh2qMMobZxXL7JhePQQs =xZ6U -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5453d181.2050...@affinityvision.com.au
Re: Can you all please stop?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 31/10/2014 4:20 PM, Russ Allbery wrote: > I believe that the core, beautiful, exciting thing that we do inside > Debian, and that any other excellent Linux distribution does, is exactly > accepting what upstream does. Not accepting in the sense of passive > apathy, but in the sense of wholehearted embrace of upstream's ideas, > expertise, passion, and hard work, and finding a way to incorporate that > into our distribution. Acceptance in the sense of reaching out with both > hands and taking hold of the gift we are given with a firm grasp and a > grateful heart. Thanks for your response, it is very well considered and written. The trouble is that the "hedgehogs" seem to be going for the /easy/ option of giving in to systemd, rather that thinking about what is actually best in the interests for their works ... perhaps systemd is the best for them because it is becoming the "tyranny of the default" [1], the last paragraph is gold. If that is the case though, it is going to be hard to revert later -- best to more properly consider the consequences as early as possible, rather than go the /easy/ way and succumb to systemd. Thanks A. [1] http://www.mylinuxrig.com/post/9120015925/linux-and-the-tyranny-of-the-default -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) iF4EAREIAAYFAlRTJEsACgkQqBZry7fv4vsjWgEAxaRLDN9+4PatToN8a4qraIR3 cvqBLzmupEKwk6muB5MBAJc0PyoFwAJKvI+nKR/LtniYQ3tuJ0HFijoAMOjFbuhO =5H93 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5453244e.4070...@affinityvision.com.au
Re: Can you all please stop?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 31/10/2014 3:48 AM, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 04:12:04PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote: >> Of course RHEL and Fedora dropped sysvinit support, they are Redhat >> derived. Can anybody guess where systemd is devloped? >> >> The more important that Debian does not drop support for sysvinit then, >> until alternatives have stabilized :) (and systemd/uselessd is deferred >> to PID 2). PID 1 should be as small as possible, see a proposed >> implementation in: http://ewontfix.com/14/ > I must note that this is a list of "Voting announcements and discussion" > and not yet another place where people, many of them non-DD and thus not > entitled to vote or take part in the pre-vote procedures, could endlessly > repeat their opinions, many of them FUD, about things somehow related to > the vote. It is not FUD and that is a major problem in itself, the misrepresentation or understanding of the real problems people have with systemd. If upstream is the problem, then they need lobbying; just accepting what upstream does is a very serious problem -- of course, us mere mortal users *have* to accept DDs as our only "upstream" with a real voice. Users have pushed back, with very good reasons, so too must DDs ... unless they don't understand the problems being expressed. Take your blinkers off, this is NOT FUD -- these issues are very REAL! This is a very real issue that will drive many away from Linux and looking to alternatives, myself, that may end up being kFreeBSD, but if that doesn't get the blessing of the Jessie release team ... then I've got to consider going directly to FreeBSD as a real alternative. A. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) iF4EAREIAAYFAlRTGNoACgkQqBZry7fv4vtTkQEAgxUOO7oLuAolxW3fuwAJCFEo lNNMz5os5TG2XqlT5qkA/R61mpFSXp+Grkn5MGy0yN9eRxZ5BTYgLzZmS421q9Xn =6A5R -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/545318de.4000...@affinityvision.com.au
