Re: [Dng] Puppy Linux-related thoughts
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 11:24:03PM -0400, Apollia wrote: > > Regarding desktops - perhaps Puppy Linux might be a good place to look for > some inspiration? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puppy_Linux > > So small, light, fast, and relatively easy to use, even for total Linux > newbies. Ah yes, Puppy Linux. I've used that a lot. (Most of) the standard ingredients are an apt-get away; it's usually jwm, rxvt-unicode, mhwaveedit, geany, abiword, gnumeric, ... Partly it's looking for lightweight applications, partly it's avoiding duplicates (though there are a few of those!), and partly it's the window manager and related details. In a standard Puppy, there is no Python; I'm not sure if Perl is stock, either. > I have to admit, some of the default out-of-the-box settings of most any > Puppy Linux I've tried annoy the heck out of me, like having to > single-click instead of double-click to open things. > > But the software preinstalled in them is often quite nice and well-chosen, > and many quickly became favorites of mine. (Geany, NoteCase, mtPaint, > Viewnior, etc...) > > And most Puppy Linuxes I've tried make it very easy to get on the internet, > something I recall usually being difficult to do back in 2011 when I was a > Windows XP user trying various Linux live discs. Last I knew, there were at least 3 network managers that were puppy-specific (Simple Network Scanner, Frisbee, PeasyWifi...and maybe clinet from pupngo counts also). All the standard ones are written in shellscript + gtkdialog. Even though there's an icon for the terminal right on the desktop, the Puppy Linux developers work on the assumption that you should never *need* to open it to get things working. > I've also increasingly been considering trying to build my own Linux from > scratch, probably using this website as a guide: > http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/ If you want a short build, look at Bootstrap Linux or ELFS: https://github.com/pikhq/bootstrap-linux http://kanj.github.io/elfs/book/ (and clfs-embedded is simple too, but it's harder to get.) As a rule of thumb, before you try building a Linux system from scratch you should make sure you can configure a kernel that works for your hardware. Spoiler: "make localmodconfig" and "make localyesconfig" are your friends. > Another good thing about Puppy Linux is that it's one of the major holdouts > against adopting systemd, according to this blog post by Barry Kauler, the > creator of Puppy Linux: > > http://bkhome.org/news/?viewDetailed=00114 > > > One of my favorite things about Puppy Linux is the fact that the entire > operating system can be loaded into RAM, which helps make things very fast. This requires stripping everything down as small as possible, choosing small programs, and so on. > Another of my favorite things is that I don't have to even have the OS > installed on my hard disk, and thus I don't have to worry that I might > accidentally break my entire system and have to reinstall everything from > scratch just because of installing (or doing) the wrong thing. This is due to the use of squashfs and aufs (Another Union Filesystem). squashfs is a compressed archive with a readonly "driver" in the kernel. Union filesystems, in general, create a "filesystem" by layering multiple mounts. A Pupsave file is a file containing a ext* filesystem that gets mounted as the top layer of a union filesystem, over an SFS layer. > Another type of Puppy installation is a "full installation". If I'm not > mistaken, the difference between a Puppy full installation and a Puppy > frugal installation (with a Pupsave file) is, I think a full installation > isn't loaded into RAM, and changed files get saved to disk immediately, > rather than being saved to a Pupsave file after a delay and either > automatically and periodically, or upon the user's request. A full install is a classic Linux install, with no layers and no SFS. > (With a frugal installation without a Pupsave file, nothing gets saved, and > you just get asked at shutdown whether you want to create a Pupsave file, > and you're able to refuse to create one.) > > I believe a frugal installation + a Pupsave file is probably the most > frequently recommended way of doing things - but a full installation might > in some circumstances be better, such as on a system with too little RAM to > comfortably load the entire operating system into RAM. > > > Anyway, I haven't yet heard of anyone else using a similar approach to the > way I run Linux - always booting my system from scratch with a default > Puppy Linux frugal installation with no Pupsave file, and then running my > Puppy Linux Setup Kit to install all of my customizations and preferred > software, and never saving anything to a Pupsave file, nor saving anything > to a multisession live CD or DVD of Puppy. I haven't looked at what you do/what they did, but this sounds vaguely like what Tinycore Linux does. Thanks, Isaac Dunham a/k/a "ibidem" on the Puppy Lin
[Dng] Puppy Linux-related thoughts - was Re: API: was (for who knows what reason): Dng Digest, Vol 6, Issue 75
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Didier Kryn wrote: > > Le 22/03/2015 16:59, Steve Litt a écrit : > >> On Sun, 22 Mar 2015 12:53:02 + >> Nuno Magalhães wrote: >> >> >On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 7:24 AM, T.J. Duchene >>> >wrote: >>> > >What I said was at some point Devuan will probably have to support > >systemd's API, in order to support upstream projects that actually > >require systemd. >>> > >>> >Why? >>> > >>> >Biggest example: GNOME (now) requires systemd. I don't want systemd, >>> >so, i won't use GNOME. If i want either, i'll use Debian, not Devuan. >>> >> I agree 100% with Nuno. >> >> I agree also. Me too. > I'm still not against leaving some room to Gnome/KDE to come in if they > find a way to run with stubs, or totally without systemd (which I doubt), > but I absolutely don't care if Devuan has none of them. > Same here. I recently ran across a Funtoo forum page which said they have a systemd-free version of GNOME: http://forums.funtoo.org/topic/111-gnome-312-is-here/ But, that was posted way back in July 2014. > 99% people use Windows or Mac. Out of the 1% using Linux or BSD, 80% > try painfully to get shomething working out of Gnome, because it's > installed by default and they don't know of usable DEs they could install. > > I think a Linux desktop with Xfce4 as default is going to be more > attractive than Debian to any user, even if they didn't hear of systemd. > Think of it: a desktop that's usable, out of the box! The Desktop is going > to make the difference, because, of course, Debian Gnome/Linux will force > people into Gnome's hell (no typo). > > Didier > I agree. (Despite not having very much experience with XFCE or GNOME, I've already seen enough to like XFCE more than GNOME.) Regarding desktops - perhaps Puppy Linux might be a good place to look for some inspiration? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puppy_Linux So small, light, fast, and relatively easy to use, even for total Linux newbies. I have to admit, some of the default out-of-the-box settings of most any Puppy Linux I've tried annoy the heck out of me, like having to single-click instead of double-click to open things. But the software preinstalled in them is often quite nice and well-chosen, and many quickly became favorites of mine. (Geany, NoteCase, mtPaint, Viewnior, etc...) And most Puppy Linuxes I've tried make it very easy to get on the internet, something I recall usually being difficult to do back in 2011 when I was a Windows XP user trying various Linux live discs. Customizing things exactly to my tastes did take a while, but after I went to the trouble, my customized Lucid Puppy 5.2, Lucid Puppy 5.2.8 version 004, and Lighthouse 64 Puppy 6.02 Beta 2 became the nicest, most comfortable operating systems I've ever used. And they (and other Puppies) already were the fastest operating systems I ever used, without me having to customize them at all. If I recall correctly, not even any of the other Linux live discs I tried years ago compared well to Puppy's speed. I've been using various forms of Puppy Linux since Feb. 2011. Before that, I was a Windows XP user. (Actually, I still use Windows XP a lot, but now usually inside a VirtualBox in Puppy Linux, rather than non-virtual Windows XP.) I've been very happy using either IceWM or Openbox (my new favorite) as my window manager, and Puppy's usual default file manager Rox-Filer. (And sometimes either xfe or TuxCommander in cases where I needed a multi-pane file manager.) I actually have hardly any experience with GNOME, KDE, or similar desktop environments, and, so far, I have also never used any Linux other than Puppy long-term. Though I have been itching to try some other Linuxes, because I think it would at least be educational for me to get more familiar with a more typical distro. I've also increasingly been considering trying to build my own Linux from scratch, probably using this website as a guide: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/ Another good thing about Puppy Linux is that it's one of the major holdouts against adopting systemd, according to this blog post by Barry Kauler, the creator of Puppy Linux: http://bkhome.org/news/?viewDetailed=00114 One of my favorite things about Puppy Linux is the fact that the entire operating system can be loaded into RAM, which helps make things very fast. Another of my favorite things is that I don't have to even have the OS installed on my hard disk, and thus I don't have to worry that I might accidentally break my entire system and have to reinstall everything from scratch just because of installing (or doing) the wrong thing. (That also made it easier for me to switch to Linux, back when I was primarily a Windows XP user. Not having to actually install anything on my computer, and being able to boot and run a complete, fast Puppy Linux system - rather than just a sluggish preview - via a live CD or DVD, made me feel more comfortable trying Linux, sinc
Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet
> On March 22, 2015 at 6:29 AM Jaromil wrote: > > On Sat, 21 Mar 2015, Peter Olson wrote: > > > RMS didn't call me a troll, he answered the question. Somebody else > > took it upon himself to refer to the question as trolling. I haven't > > decided yet whether to speak to that person tomorrow about it. > > Stefano refused my definition of bullying, which indeed may be debated. Stefano and I had an amicable conversation about the issue and I understand his point of view. As far as bullying goes, I am older than RMS, so I am not easily bullied by anyone. I'm OK with the situation as it stands now. I'm unhappy that RMS didn't have an opinion to share, but it's his prerogative. Peter Olson ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet
Would it be possible to avoid offensive characterization of people who do not think along the same lines? Would it be possible to avoid gender-biased characterization of people who are participating in this list? Thank you == hk ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet
> I think everyone is in agreement that they fulfill the letter of the > license. The spirit may be lacking especially in regards to access. > Being an enormous, interdependent hairball simply puts the code out of > reach for all practical purposes as well as restricting use. Again, > that's spirit and not letter and the license does not address that. > There is however one large, long running project which does take code > legibility and quality and those kinds of things into account, in > addition to license. Maybe that's something for GPLv4, or maybe not. RMS admits that he wrote GCC as an interdependent hairball, simply to make it impossible to reuse parts of it in commercial applications. So I doubt that RMS will end up condemning "hairballs" in GPLv4 (or later). That change would require him to fight a project he started and to push it into a direction he is not at all comfortable with. ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet
On 22.03.2015 22:00, KatolaZ wrote: > Well, we might all agree on despising the systemd-nonsense on a > technical level, but nobody can say it's not free software without > being considered a fool. The systemd-nonsense is distributed with a > free software license, therefore it *is* free software... I think everyone is in agreement that they fulfill the letter of the license. The spirit may be lacking especially in regards to access. Being an enormous, interdependent hairball simply puts the code out of reach for all practical purposes as well as restricting use. Again, that's spirit and not letter and the license does not address that. There is however one large, long running project which does take code legibility and quality and those kinds of things into account, in addition to license. Maybe that's something for GPLv4, or maybe not. > ...What is strange in the report made by Jaromil is the fact that just > asking a question about the systemd-nonsense classifies you as a > troll, which is quite unusual in the free software community... Not strange at all, in context. That's how they roll, at least as long as I've been following the situation, which has been about 18 months. Anything other than praise results in name calling or calls to shut up and/or just use it from the boosters. Their reactions can probably be sorted into formal logical fallacies if that matters and if they are going to be called on it. Regards, Lars ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
[Dng] Troll accusations and what to do about them: was: rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet
On Sun, 22 Mar 2015 20:00:24 + KatolaZ wrote: > What is strange in the report made by Jaromil is the fact that just > asking a question about the systemd-nonsense classifies you as a > troll, which is quite unusual in the free software community. Characterizing the anti-systemd person as a troll is standard operating procedure throughout large swaths of the Linux world. It's *not* just on the Debian-User mailing list. A guy on a LUG list was bragging about his favorite distro, and I asked him several questions about its init system, and he got extremely hostile. Another LUG list: I said systemd is a mess, and was accused of immaturity. On my own LUG list, GoLUG, a LUG that I created and am the nominal leader of, I got hostility from more than one person for my questions about where to go to get away from systemd, and one usual attendee did not attend my GoLUG presentation on alternative init systems. On the Claws-Mail list, I asked about possible future systemd entanglements, got some hostility, before the answer finally came down that one, tiny, optional portion depends on systemd (via dbus) for telling you there's email, but beyond that, no systemd dependencies would ever be necessary. When I advocate for Epoch, runit, OpenRC or Devuan, some react with hostility. The guys with the biggest megaphones say we're trolls, and the (amazingly clueless) rank and file LUG inhabitants take their word as the gospel. WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT... We're doing it. Making a no-systemd distro, and having it work, is pure credibility. So is solder-bridging an alternate init around the force-installed systemd on a random distro, and letting the world know about it. So is patiently educating LUG members who think they know so much, but treat init as a black box, why systemd's architecture is so dangerous to the OS we all use. And most of all, when you are met with hostility, as you most certainly will be, let them know you live in a free country, you use free software, and you're free to banish any software from your computer. And explain why it makes your computer usage better and more satisfying to do so. Above all, keep evangelizing. We faced the same hostility in the late 1990's while evangelizing Linux. We've been here before. I'll leave you with a quote from Mahatma Gandhi: "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." SteveT Steve Litt* http://www.troubleshooters.com/ Troubleshooting Training * Human Performance ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet
On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 07:09:50PM +0200, Lars Noodén wrote: > On 21.03.2015 18:51, Linuxito wrote: > > Great reading. I knew RMS would answer something like that to that > > question, if it's licensed under GPL, it's free software, period. > > ( Actually it's LGPL [1] but ... ) > > I expect that he is thinking about it and will be thinking about it a > while longer before he comes up with a formal position on this > particular piece of nastiness. On the issues of "tivoization" and > proprietary javascript he was able to come up with something. Here the > situation is not much different, but the method being (ab)used is > obfuscation. The code base is so overwhelmingly massive, convoluted, > uncommented, and undocumented that it is very effectively obfuscated and > closed. For all the other bad things that systemd does, it violates the > spirit of the GPL on two levels: freedom 0 and freedom 1. > > - the hard dependencies prevent programs from being run as one wishes > - the obfuscated code prevents studying and changing, for nearly all > Well, we might all agree on despising the systemd-nonsense on a technical level, but nobody can say it's not free software without being considered a fool. The systemd-nonsense is distributed with a free software license, therefore it *is* free software. Anybody can use, distribute, modify and redistribute modified versions of the systemd-nonsense, so all the four essential freedoms of the definition of Free Software are guaranteed. Fullstop. The case of tivo is *extremely* and *fundamentally* different, so please just let's try avoiding mixing up oil and water, since we can't succeed, and produces only confusion and endless discussions. The answer of RMS is quite normal and expected: he is devoted his entire life to the fight for software freedom, and the systemd-nonsense is a free (nonsense) software, so what kind of opinion do you expect from him? After all, nobody has *forced* all the distibutions to adopt the systemd-nonsense, and nobody could. It was a *free* choice, even if we agree that it has probably been a stupid one, and it can virtually be reverted at any time (and this is what Devuan is actually trying to do). What is strange in the report made by Jaromil is the fact that just asking a question about the systemd-nonsense classifies you as a troll, which is quite unusual in the free software community. Let's keep calm, and avoid fuss. HND KatolaZ -- [ Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ --- GLUG Catania -- Freaknet Medialab ] [ me [at] katolaz.homeunix.net -- http://katolaz.homeunix.net -- ] [ GNU/Linux User:#325780/ICQ UIN: #258332181/GPG key ID 0B5F062F ] [ Fingerprint: 8E59 D6AA 445E FDB4 A153 3D5A 5F20 B3AE 0B5F 062F ] ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [Dng] API: was (for who knows what reason): Dng Digest, Vol 6, Issue 75, Devuan commitments - will trade-off be applied?
Sorry about that bad Subject line, gentlemen. I used Gmail's web interface last night and it totally screwed things up. @Steve Litt, Numo, and Patrick: Frankly everyone, without trying to be rude here - that is your prerogative whether you like or hate Gnome, systemd or whatever. I support your choice, but I personally don't care either way. =) What I was referring to was a matter of programming in order to save time. That has nothing to do with personal predilections. You'll have to excuse me, but I'm not going to waste any more time comparing porting strategy on one hand versus personal feelings regarding systemd on the other. The two have absolutely nothing to do with each other. If any of you have some point of technical merit, that's fine, and I would be more than pleased to discuss it with anyone. The rest is just a waste of time. Trapping systemd calls in a stub can and would save time porting software from Debian to Devuan in the future. It's as simple as that, and not an endorsement of systemd. @Didier: Having a stub is exactly what I was referring to, Didier. I really don't see what all the howling is about. I agree about XFCE. Laters all. T.J. ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
[Dng] Devuan commitments - will trade-off be applied? {FW copy - was : Dng Digest, Vol 6, Issue 75 by mistake)
From: T.J. Duchene [mailto:t.j.duch...@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, March 22, 2015 2:25 AM To: dng@lists.dyne.org Subject: Re: Dng Digest, Vol 6, Issue 75 Hey Steve! "Do you understand what mailing list this is?" Yes. I do. I didn't start the discussion. I actually recommended tabling it until after Devuan is released. "Why in the *world* would we go to the substantial trouble of depoetterizing Debian if we wanted systemd to sneak back in via some form of API." What I said was at some point Devuan will probably have to support systemd's API, in order to support upstream projects that actually require systemd. "The majority of users having systemd, no, the majority of users have Windows, and that doesn't tempt me to make the OS I work with everyday more Windows like. "Most users" don't cut no ice in LinuxLand." I can't tell if you are being facetious, or not. I don't know you well. Obviously, if we are discussing Devuan, then clearly we are not talking about Windows users. The majority of Linux users DO use systemd, if only by default, because almost all distributions do so. "Why you want Devuan to have any accommodation for systemd is a mystery to me." Having established that a majority of Linux users are using systemd, I think it is likely that at least some upstream projects are going to use whatever is most convenient for the majority. It doesn't have to be technically stellar or even an intelligent choice. Devuan could always eject the software from the distribution or fork their own version, but at what point is Devuan going to be unable to keep up? I can't say for sure or even if it would happen. What I can say for sure is that trapping the systemd API would save a lot of work forking software. I don't consider saving time and effort unreasonable. but what I think doesn't matter. Draw your own conclusions. "Hey T.J., you're not in ArmstrongLand anymore: " I'm sorry, I do not understand the reference. Please explain. Thanks! T.J. ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [Dng] API: was (for who knows what reason): Dng Digest, Vol 6, Issue 75
Le 22/03/2015 16:59, Steve Litt a écrit : On Sun, 22 Mar 2015 12:53:02 + Nuno Magalhães wrote: >On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 7:24 AM, T.J. Duchene >wrote: > >What I said was at some point Devuan will probably have to support > >systemd's API, in order to support upstream projects that actually > >require systemd. > >Why? > >Biggest example: GNOME (now) requires systemd. I don't want systemd, >so, i won't use GNOME. If i want either, i'll use Debian, not Devuan. I agree 100% with Nuno. I agree also. I'm still not against leaving some room to Gnome/KDE to come in if they find a way to run with stubs, or totally without systemd (which I doubt), but I absolutely don't care if Devuan has none of them. 99% people use Windows or Mac. Out of the 1% using Linux or BSD, 80% try painfully to get shomething working out of Gnome, because it's installed by default and they don't know of usable DEs they could install. I think a Linux desktop with Xfce4 as default is going to be more attractive than Debian to any user, even if they didn't hear of systemd. Think of it: a desktop that's usable, out of the box! The Desktop is going to make the difference, because, of course, Debian Gnome/Linux will force people into Gnome's hell (no typo). Didier ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [Dng] API: was (for who knows what reason): Dng Digest, Vol 6, Issue 75
On Sun, 22 Mar 2015 12:53:02 + Nuno Magalhães wrote: > On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 7:24 AM, T.J. Duchene > wrote: > > What I said was at some point Devuan will probably have to support > > systemd's API, in order to support upstream projects that actually > > require systemd. > > Why? > > Biggest example: GNOME (now) requires systemd. I don't want systemd, > so, i won't use GNOME. If i want either, i'll use Debian, not Devuan. I agree 100% with Nuno. > > I don't understand this sheeple need to do what everybody else does, > indded it's redmondesque. I agree with this *more* than Nuno does. > If you want that, go use another distro, > there are hundreds out there who are doing what everybody else does. > Use Ubuntu, it's fashionable and Debian-like. I agree 100% with Nuno. > > This particular distro, at least it seems to me, was born to *avoid* > lock-ins like systemd. I agree 100% with Nuno. > Or stuff that depends on lock-ins like systemd, > which makes it [the dependant stuff] locked-in as well. Call it > another kind of GPL thing if you will, systemd is becoming a UNIX™. > Back then, GNU came along and created free versions (minus the > kernel); nowaways, there's systemd™, and here's Devuan. > > So far the most sensible approach of established distros, to me, has > been that of gentoo (which i'm currently exploring): they use OpenRC > by default, but you're free to use systemd _if_ you want[1]. *That* is > freedom of choice and i sincerely hope they won't succumb to the > pressure. Since Debian didn't go that way (a sad surprise considering > what i thought Debian was), here's Devuan. > (I'm not considering Slackware at the moment 'cos Mr Volkerding hasn't > been specific, he's wait-and-see-ing apparently.) The one fly in the *too solution is that *too has completely different knowledge and time requirements for installation and maintenance than do easy installers like Devuan, Debian, Manjaro, Fedora, Centos, OpenSuSE, OpenBSD and the like. Quite apart from Mr. Volkerding's ultimate solution, Slack also has very different knowledge and time requirements. If you want an easy-installing free OS, from what I've seen, you're pretty much restricted to Devuan, Manjaro-OpenRC, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, PC-BSD, or laying down something like Epoch to solder-bridge around systemd, and then doing a lot of fancy footwork to undo systemd's application level damage. > > Devuan's not at established distro and the purpose has been, from the > beginning, to avoid lock-ins. Yes! > You're free to package upstart or some > other non-intrusive init system for Devuan, i'm sure the VUA won't > mind, and then there'll be the choice between two "unlocked" init > systems (implicitly calling systemd an init system is an > understatement). But i don't see systemd in the Devuan universe - > that'll completely defeat the purpose. Yes! This is what I was trying to say to T.J. SteveT Steve Litt* http://www.troubleshooters.com/ Troubleshooting Training * Human Performance ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet
On Sun, 22 Mar 2015 11:29:58 +0100 Jaromil wrote: > But at the very least the episode is that of public denigration for > somoene asking a question, made worse by the fact it is operated by a > renown public figure and leader. This just sets an example for all the > other guys present, plus gives a picture of the attitude of such > Debian bullies. Please don't call them bullies. That gives them a power they just don't have, and makes the Dng giants seem like victims. Call them what they really are: Sissies so scared of Red Hat they do Red Hat's bidding and make snide remarks when questioned about that. They inspire laughter, not fear. SteveT Steve Litt* http://www.troubleshooters.com/ Troubleshooting Training * Human Performance ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [Dng] Dng Digest, Vol 6, Issue 75
I support Nuno. +1 On 22.03.2015 13:53, Nuno Magalhães wrote: > On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 7:24 AM, T.J. Duchene wrote: >> What I said was at some point Devuan will probably have to support systemd's >> API, in order to support upstream projects that actually require systemd. > > Why? > > Biggest example: GNOME (now) requires systemd. I don't want systemd, > so, i won't use GNOME. If i want either, i'll use Debian, not Devuan. > > I don't understand this sheeple need to do what everybody else does, > indded it's redmondesque. If you want that, go use another distro, > there are hundreds out there who are doing what everybody else does. > Use Ubuntu, it's fashionable and Debian-like. > > This particular distro, at least it seems to me, was born to *avoid* > lock-ins like systemd. Or stuff that depends on lock-ins like systemd, > which makes it [the dependant stuff] locked-in as well. Call it > another kind of GPL thing if you will, systemd is becoming a UNIX™. > Back then, GNU came along and created free versions (minus the > kernel); nowaways, there's systemd™, and here's Devuan. > > So far the most sensible approach of established distros, to me, has > been that of gentoo (which i'm currently exploring): they use OpenRC > by default, but you're free to use systemd _if_ you want[1]. *That* is > freedom of choice and i sincerely hope they won't succumb to the > pressure. Since Debian didn't go that way (a sad surprise considering > what i thought Debian was), here's Devuan. > (I'm not considering Slackware at the moment 'cos Mr Volkerding hasn't > been specific, he's wait-and-see-ing apparently.) > > Devuan's not at established distro and the purpose has been, from the > beginning, to avoid lock-ins. You're free to package upstart or some > other non-intrusive init system for Devuan, i'm sure the VUA won't > mind, and then there'll be the choice between two "unlocked" init > systems (implicitly calling systemd an init system is an > understatement). But i don't see systemd in the Devuan universe - > that'll completely defeat the purpose. Will avoiding systemd cause > more work? Definitely. But what's the rush? Release when ready. > > My 0.02 > > Cheers, > Nuno > > [1] > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Handbook:AMD64/Installation/Base#Optional:_Using_systemd > ___ > Dng mailing list > Dng@lists.dyne.org > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng > ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [Dng] Dng Digest, Vol 6, Issue 75
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 7:24 AM, T.J. Duchene wrote: > What I said was at some point Devuan will probably have to support systemd's > API, in order to support upstream projects that actually require systemd. Why? Biggest example: GNOME (now) requires systemd. I don't want systemd, so, i won't use GNOME. If i want either, i'll use Debian, not Devuan. I don't understand this sheeple need to do what everybody else does, indded it's redmondesque. If you want that, go use another distro, there are hundreds out there who are doing what everybody else does. Use Ubuntu, it's fashionable and Debian-like. This particular distro, at least it seems to me, was born to *avoid* lock-ins like systemd. Or stuff that depends on lock-ins like systemd, which makes it [the dependant stuff] locked-in as well. Call it another kind of GPL thing if you will, systemd is becoming a UNIX™. Back then, GNU came along and created free versions (minus the kernel); nowaways, there's systemd™, and here's Devuan. So far the most sensible approach of established distros, to me, has been that of gentoo (which i'm currently exploring): they use OpenRC by default, but you're free to use systemd _if_ you want[1]. *That* is freedom of choice and i sincerely hope they won't succumb to the pressure. Since Debian didn't go that way (a sad surprise considering what i thought Debian was), here's Devuan. (I'm not considering Slackware at the moment 'cos Mr Volkerding hasn't been specific, he's wait-and-see-ing apparently.) Devuan's not at established distro and the purpose has been, from the beginning, to avoid lock-ins. You're free to package upstart or some other non-intrusive init system for Devuan, i'm sure the VUA won't mind, and then there'll be the choice between two "unlocked" init systems (implicitly calling systemd an init system is an understatement). But i don't see systemd in the Devuan universe - that'll completely defeat the purpose. Will avoiding systemd cause more work? Definitely. But what's the rush? Release when ready. My 0.02 Cheers, Nuno [1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Handbook:AMD64/Installation/Base#Optional:_Using_systemd ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet
On Sun 22 March 2015 11:29:54 devuan...@spamgourmet.net wrote: > Considering that the blog post is all about putting an idea up for > discussion I really do not see how that can be undiscussed and > unsolicited. How should you get a discussion started on the internet? Considering how I clearly stated that I referenced to the blogpost because of something *absolutely* *unrelated* to all this, I really don't see why I'd be interested to contribute detailing this thread further. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 2:40 AM, Jude Nelson - jud...@gmail.com wrote: >> The only way not to be forcing anybody is to stick with the least >> common denominator for everything. That flat out stops progress. > > This is simply not true. A key hallmark of good application design is to > keep the business logic as decoupled as possible from the layers beneath it, > thereby enabling both freedom of choice for the user and independence from > the application's needs for the stack's developers. Often, this is achieved > by means of a "driver" that translates requests from the business logic to > the underlying layers and back. There is no application design in that proposal whatsoever. It is only a proposal to split up a distribution into a set of files with similar properties and how to use mount to combine those sets again. > For example, ZFS offers many similar features to btrfs, including > subvolumes. Moreover, lvm lets you create subvolumes too, and you could > emulate a subvolume on a vanilla filesystem by keeping each "subvolume" in a > separate flat file. So go ahead and use ZFS then. Or go for LVM or even ext4. Lennart wants to use btrfs since it provides a couple of interesting properties, and since it is (compared to zfs) widely available on Linux. > A well-designed application that lets you > activate/deactivate different classes of subvolumes for different > application suites (as Lennart proposed) would define a driver model for > interfacing with a sufficiently capable filesystem, and would ship with > driver implementations for interfacing with btrfs subvolumes, ZFS > subvolumes, lvm volumes, and "emulated" subvolumes. The application suite > management aspect of the program does not need to be coupled to the > underlying filesystem implementation; keeping them separate makes it easy to > add support for new filesystems and volume managers beyond what the original > developers thought of. Why on earth would you want to have a driver model? That alone is more code than the entire functionality of the code you want to plug the model into! You are aware that we are talking here about "find a couple of folders (or subvolumes) following a certain name schema and mount two of those". That is a script with less than 10 lines of code. Just write another 10 line script if the original one does not work for you. > Coupling the application's business logic to lower layers in the stack > prevents these wonderful properties from manifesting. ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 2:34 AM, Joerg Reisenweber - reisenwe...@web.de wrote: > From > *"root fs: any you like, even MSDOS (with some limitations)" * > to an undiscussed unsolicited > *"root fs: btrfs mandatory"* > is *not* the kind of "progress" I want to see happen, ever. The interesting properties are actually pretty independent of the filesystem used: As long as you can mount something to show up in some other directory you are fine. Considering that the blog post is all about putting an idea up for discussion I really do not see how that can be undiscussed and unsolicited. How should you get a discussion started on the internet? > It trades in quite a set of nice properties for a few new properties percieved > "superior" by a small set of developers who think they're the ones to decide > (or "the universe spins around them" as some guy said) and were allowed to > ignore the notion of significant parts of their users and developer peers. People put ideas up for discussion on the internet. If that bothers you so much you might want to spend your time elsewhere. > Odds are those properties they're sacrificing are actually urgently needed by > quite a number of installations, and probably the new featureset could as well > get achived *without* *sacrificing* backward compatibility. Then those people should not implement the idea and move on with their lives, or they can adapt it to their needs -- if they care. The only part somewhat limited to btrfs is sending a snapshot over the network, and even that could be done in a number of different ways. The rest is just about splitting up a distribution into a set of files with similar properties and how to combine those sets again with a couple of simple mounts. No magic whatsoever. > For your usecase: btrfs is around already, snapper is too, who needs those > massive changes in packaging of a distro and file hierarchy? Snapper is way more complex than a couple of static mounts. I like simple solutions. There is no change in packaging of a distro. The file hierarchy is not really changed either, provided you do not buy into the notion that some binaries are more special than others and need to be stored in their own special place. And even that can be fixed with a couple of symlinks on the user side. BR, Karl ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet
On Sat, 21 Mar 2015, Peter Olson wrote: > > On March 21, 2015 at 6:36 PM Robert Storey > > wrote: > > > > Hopefully, it's just a rumor, though it sounds real. > > > > Indeed, I've been wondering why RMS hasn't commented on systemd long > > ago when it became obvious that it would effectively dump his > > beloved Hurd project into the trash can. If he really called someone > > a "troll" for asking his opinion of systemd, then my feeling about > > RMS has gone down a couple of notches. > > RMS didn't call me a troll, he answered the question. Somebody else > took it upon himself to refer to the question as trolling. I haven't > decided yet whether to speak to that person tomorrow about it. Stefano refused my definition of bullying, which indeed may be debated. But at the very least the episode is that of public denigration for somoene asking a question, made worse by the fact it is operated by a renown public figure and leader. This just sets an example for all the other guys present, plus gives a picture of the attitude of such Debian bullies. So well, I do think is bullying, but ultimately you decide and I may be wrong on that - and as Steve says, no big deal really, we know this happens all the time, I just think it is right to point it out and call it for what it is, rather than being bullied and stay in silence. again thanks for asking that question Peter, ciao ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [Dng] Dng Digest, Vol 6, Issue 75
Hey Steve! "Do you understand what mailing list this is?" Yes. I do. I didn't start the discussion. I actually recommended tabling it until after Devuan is released. "Why in the *world* would we go to the substantial trouble of depoetterizing Debian if we wanted systemd to sneak back in via some form of API." What I said was at some point Devuan will probably have to support systemd's API, in order to support upstream projects that actually require systemd. "The majority of users having systemd, no, the majority of users have Windows, and that doesn't tempt me to make the OS I work with everyday more Windows like. "Most users" don't cut no ice in LinuxLand." I can't tell if you are being facetious, or not. I don't know you well. Obviously, if we are discussing Devuan, then clearly we are not talking about Windows users. The majority of Linux users DO use systemd, if only by default, because almost all distributions do so. "Why you want Devuan to have any accommodation for systemd is a mystery to me." Having established that a majority of Linux users are using systemd, I think it is likely that at least some upstream projects are going to use whatever is most convenient for the majority. It doesn't have to be technically stellar or even an intelligent choice. Devuan could always eject the software from the distribution or fork their own version, but at what point is Devuan going to be unable to keep up? I can't say for sure or even if it would happen. What I can say for sure is that trapping the systemd API would save a lot of work forking software. I don't consider saving time and effort unreasonable. but what I think doesn't matter. Draw your own conclusions. "Hey T.J., you're not in ArmstrongLand anymore: " I'm sorry, I do not understand the reference. Please explain. Thanks! T.J. ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
