Re: [DNG] Another problem you won't have without Systemd (or separate oomd)

2022-08-20 Thread Steve Litt
On Sat, 2022-08-20 at 10:20 +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> You cannot make this up, can you?
> 
> Bug 2119518 - GNOME being OOM killed during basic use on VM with 2G of 
> RAM 
> 
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2119518

Martin, after reading this, I think it's not a bug but a feature. It has the
positive effect of sending anybody stupid enough to use BOTH systemd and Gnome 
off
their computer and back onto their slide rule, where they belong. Now if they 
could
only get systemd on their slide rule...

> 
> It still seems to be that people think adding complexity comes without 
> risk of malfunction.

No doubt about it. A lot of folks not only fail to see the risk, but they 
worship
complexity. Did you know there's now a bicycle derailleur that works via 
Bluetooth,
so you have to have a very breakable electronic control device on board, and
somebody can hack your derailleur? The derailleur costs hundreds, and it's 
sealed
shut with no hope of repair. The bicycle mechanic at the local bicycle store 
spoke
lavishly of this derailleur technology. They're flying off the shelves at your 
local
bicycle store.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF BICYCLE DERAILLEURS:

Before 1971, dominated by Huret and Simplex, derailleurs were so poorly 
designed and
so imprecisely made that you had to pull back too far on the derailleur cable 
shift
lever, wait for the derailleur to shift, and then correctly place the handle.
Shifting could take up to five seconds. But at least you could twiddle it to 
hit any
gear regardless of cable friction, derailleur friction and/or slop, or 
chain/gear
wear. And at least you could use any shit lever with any derailleur and gear
cluster.

1971: Suntour comes out with their Slant Pantagraph derailleur mechanism, 
Shimano's
cheap but precision made derailleurs appear in bike shops. Same shifting 
process,
but much less overpull and correction. Shifting is much easier and quicker, with
sub-second shifts a reality.

Early 1980's: With improved Suntour and Shimano shifters, improved chain 
technology
and gear design, shifting is almost effortless and instantanious, with very 
little
overpull/correction.

Late 1980's: Indexed shifters appear. The promise: No more overpull and 
correction,
just click it. And it worked as long as all aspects of the derailleur were 
properly
adjusted, there was little or no wear on the chain and chainwheel, everything 
was
lubricated perfectly, and the proper shift lever was paired with the specific
chainwheel. In practice, on less than perfectly maintained bikes, the five 
second
shift was back. Another problem: If you replaced your 5 gear rear gear cog with 
a 6
gear, you had to buy a whole new shift lever with matching gear clicks and cable
pull. You've come a long way, baby!

Early 1990's: To be "aerodynamic", and more to the point pretty, cables were 
routed
under the handlebar tape. This made basic maintenance much more difficult, and 
less
maintenance led to worse shifting.

Early 00's: Derailleur shift levers became "integrated" with the brake levers. 
Now,
if your derailleur wore out or you just wanted a better one, and the new 
derailleur
needed either more cable pull or less cable pull than the original, you needed 
to
change the shift lever, as always, but this time you had to change the whole
shifting and braking system. The 1981 bike owner just slapped on a new 
derailleur
when the old one wore out. In the new "integrated" era, if the derailleur 
required
different cable pull, you needed to replace the whole brake/derailleur handle 
with
another that accommodated the combination of brakes and new derailleur. If you 
think
they could just use a circa 1980 bolt-on down tube shift lever and leave the 
one in
the brake lever fallow, think again. Bicycle tubes were no longer standard
diameters, so you probably couldn't get such bolt-on downtube shifters. Was 
Lennart
in on this "improvement"? Just a question.

Late 2010's: Bluetooth shifting. Press a button on the handlebars, and a USB
rechargeable battery driven servo motor mounted (with cable ties) on the back 
seat
stay pulls a cable to operate the derailleur. Benefit, shorter and straighter 
cable
run. This item, which is separate from the derailleur, costs roughly $300.00. 
And
heaven help you if you're on a cross country bike trip and can't recharge it. At
least the derailleur and servo motor are separate items.

Early 2020's: Poettering's dream fulfilled: The bluetooth equipped serveo motor 
has
now been moved into the the derailleur itself. Any repair to the derailleur, 
which
is now well into the 3 figure price range, requires a long time to send it to
specialists certified to repair it. Meanwhile, you bicycle sits unrideable.


You're right. Some people worship complexity, in software and everything else. 
You
can't make this stuff up.

SteveT

___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Re: [DNG] Another problem you won't have without Systemd (or separate oomd)

2022-08-20 Thread Olaf Meeuwissen via Dng
Hi,

Martin Steigerwald writes:

> Hi!
>
> You cannot make this up, can you?
>
> Bug 2119518 - GNOME being OOM killed during basic use on VM with 2G of
> RAM
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2119518

Reading through the bug report it looks a lot like someone got their
maths wrong.  I mean using a few billion % of memory and uptimes well
over two centuries ...

> It still seems to be that people think adding complexity comes without
> risk of malfunction.
>
> oomd may make sense in certain cloud based workloads, maybe, just maybe.
> However… on a desktop? You are frigging kidding me, aren't you?

Just ran `apt search oomd` on a Daedalus machine.  It's there alright,
both oomd and systemd-oomd.  Both are installable (based on an `apt
install --dry-run` of either) but nothing seems to reverse depend on it.
BTW, systemd-oomd does not depend on oomd ...

> Thank you for Devuan! Thank you for some sanity.
>
> And yeah, it appears that with Debian oomd is not installed as standard
> so far, but if its in Fedora, it may come with Debian at some point in
> time. Or not, after their recent experiences in Fedora :) Maybe people
> can still learn.

--
Olaf Meeuwissen
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng


[DNG] Another problem you won't have without Systemd (or separate oomd)

2022-08-20 Thread Martin Steigerwald
Hi!

You cannot make this up, can you?

Bug 2119518 - GNOME being OOM killed during basic use on VM with 2G of 
RAM 

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2119518

It still seems to be that people think adding complexity comes without 
risk of malfunction.

oomd may make sense in certain cloud based workloads, maybe, just maybe. 
However… on a desktop? You are frigging kidding me, aren't you?

Thank you for Devuan! Thank you for some sanity.

And yeah, it appears that with Debian oomd is not installed as standard 
so far, but if its in Fedora, it may come with Debian at some point in 
time. Or not, after their recent experiences in Fedora :) Maybe people 
can still learn.

Best,
-- 
Martin


___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng