Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet
Le 23/03/2015 20:10, Nuno Magalhães a écrit : On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Mark R. Whitewhit...@gmail.com wrote: Just to be clear: I've seen a lot of cross talk about the possibility of systemd being put into Devuan via a sandbox or even having the systemd API written in. Is it safe to assume that going forward that there will be no systemd in Devuan? Because if there is, I'm in the wrong place. +1 If I have given to anyone the impression I supported the possibility for systemd to sneak into Devuan in some way, it was a false impression; take it as a figure of style. My concern is that a piece of software is not rejected because of its name or its author, but on well advertized general grounds. Didier ___ 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 Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 04:47:32PM -0700, Go Linux wrote: A link to Revolution OS was recently posted on irc. I had never seen it before. It seems that the cycle has come full circle and now Devuan is going back to the future and reinventing the wheel all over again. Only this time the escape isn't from MS or Apple. It is from the enemy within. If history teaches us anything it is that nothing lasts for long and that freedom has to be continuously reclaimed from those who profit from control of ideas, goods and services. I see Devuan returning to its roots as the future of Linux and cooperative freedom in the digital age . . . a light in the darkness . . . I've had this feeling for a while, that even we who know our history are doomed to repeat it. I've escaped from the clutches of DOS, Windows, OS/2 to Linux, transited through several commercial distros to Debian, only to find I have to do it over again. The difference this time, is that we have the source code, which is what the previous revolution bought us. -- hendrik ___ 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 Tue, 24 Mar 2015, Hendrik Boom wrote: On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 04:47:32PM -0700, Go Linux wrote: A link to Revolution OS was recently posted on irc. I had never seen it before. It seems that the cycle has come full circle and now Devuan is going back to the future and reinventing the wheel all over again. Only this time the escape isn't from MS or Apple. It is from the enemy within. If history teaches us anything it is that nothing lasts for long and that freedom has to be continuously reclaimed from those who profit from control of ideas, goods and services. I see Devuan returning to its roots as the future of Linux and cooperative freedom in the digital age . . . a light in the darkness . . . I've had this feeling for a while, that even we who know our history are doomed to repeat it. I've escaped from the clutches of DOS, Windows, OS/2 to Linux, transited through several commercial distros to Debian, only to find I have to do it over again. The difference this time, is that we have the source code, which is what the previous revolution bought us. I would add we have a very well organized source code history, thanks to the way Debian was made through the years. As I said before it is being fork friendly and we are finding good strategies to reach our objective with minumum effort and good gain in innovation (last but not least the Amprolla caching-repository system nextime is now coding from scratch) So well, kudos to Debian for that: it was not all wasted time and we are definitely standing on the shoulders of giants... who are being defeated by a flu. Actually, looking closer to some package history, is quite clear that the flu affecting the giant has rushed to infect vital parts of his body in order to take over completely and in most cases unnecessarily, just to rule out any opportunity of healing. Some other independent effort in the future may want to undertake an analysis of how all this story went, in the meantime we are quickly approaching a warm light at the end of the tunnel. Right after the end of this month there will be a VUA press release to update on the status of development and the financial situation of donations received, which kept coming at a steady rate, thanks to all donors! ciao ___ 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 Mon, 23 Mar 2015, devuan...@spamgourmet.net wrote: I did argue for some of things I think are sensible, just like everybody else here. All of them can be implemented _without_ systemd (and I have or had them running that way). Yes, one of the ideas I like was first proposed by Lennart, but is this about building a new distribution or about holding a grudge? no grudge at all, Devuan is the first and foremost initiative to not undertake any personal attacks and we are proud of it and the overall channeling of energies into constructive matters. We have also banned people for hatespeech against Debian developers and we would do the same for anyone attacking systemd developers. OTOH your interventions in this discussion place has been overall: - OT (as of the subject of this thread) - misquoting RMS for admitting that he wrote GCC as an interdependent hairball voluntarily (reference? well no, don't even bother please) - making false statements while debating with vdev developer, which he promptly pointed out. I hope you understand we don't need your criticism here, because it is admittedly biased and because me and others perceive it as bringing forward false arguments. If it is the later, then you won't need to bother to ban me. I'd rather make this a gentlemen process, suggest you take your coat, use the front door and farewell. I sincerely hope you will find ways to use your time in a more productive way, perhaps developing systemd. ciao signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ 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 Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Jaromil - jaro...@dyne.org devuan.kn.0edf9dfcba.jaromil#dyne@ob.0sg.net wrote: On Mon, 23 Mar 2015, KatolaZ wrote: This sounds strange and new at the same time, since GCC was indeed designed to be portable and ported to several architectures since from the beginning. Do you have any quote by RMS or by any guy who has contributed to gcc to support your statement? I don't think that GCC is a hairball, to be honest. Oh, a hairball can be portable in its entirety:-) It is just hard to use parts of it. GCC was deliberately making things interdepend on each other, even without technical reasons, simply to prevent commercial entities to replace the e.g. front-end of the compiler with some proprietary code and then have that use the GPL backend. This would enable a new, proprietary language to leverage all the optimizations gcc has. So this prevents what Apple does with swift on llvm right now, and I understand the reasoning behind that decision, even though I regret it since it prevents us from having many valuable tools for code analysis and refactoring. https://lwn.net/Articles/629259/ covers the most recent flare-up when somebody wanted to make the AST of GCC accessible. This is not the first post in which this spamgourmet account is spreading FUD. We may need to react to this beyond argumenting. I don't see anything I said on this list to be related to be spreading Fear, Uncertainty or Doubt. I did argue for some of things I think are sensible, just like everybody else here. All of them can be implemented _without_ systemd (and I have or had them running that way). Yes, one of the ideas I like was first proposed by Lennart, but is this about building a new distribution or about holding a grudge? If it is the later, then you won't need to bother to ban me. ___ 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 5:48 AM, devuan...@spamgourmet.net wrote: On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 2:40 AM, Jude Nelson - jud...@gmail.com devuan.kn.ae5676beef.judecn#gmail@ob.0sg.net 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. I believe this may be beyond a proposal, with or without an application design. In an email to linux-btrfs called Recursive subvolume snapshots and deletion, Lennart states: Since a while systemd has now by default creating btrfs subvolumes for /var/lib/machines for example. The full text can be found here: http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org/msg42455.html He also makes this statement in the email: We could work around this in userspace, of course, but it would not be atomic, and I'd much prefer if the kernel could do this on its own! Just an FYI. ___ 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
GCC was deliberately making things interdepend on each other, even without technical reasons, simply to prevent commercial entities to replace the e.g. front-end of the compiler with some proprietary code and then have that use the GPL backend. This would enable a new, proprietary language to leverage all the optimizations gcc has. So this prevents what Apple does with swift on llvm right now, and I understand the reasoning behind that decision, even though I regret it since it prevents us from having many valuable tools for code analysis and refactoring. GCC was also built at a time when proprietary compilers were the norm, and notions of free software and open source did not exist outside a few close-nit circles. What RMS did with GCC's design was make it very difficult to create and distribute proprietary extensions to GCC without violating the GPL. He did so by designing GCC such that the only supported way to add new extensions was to *statically* link them into GCC at compile-time. For example, NeXT tried to distribute a proprietary Objective-C module as a .o file that had to be linked into GCC by the developer, but were ultimately compelled by the GPL to release the code. It's worth pointing out that GCC has since become a lot less monolithic (it was still modular internally, however), in part due to competition with LLVM/Clang, in part because it make interoperability easier, and in part because the market expects open source compilers. Not sure how this is related to systemd exactly, but suggesting that we prioritize LLVM/Clang over GCC because we prioritized sysvinit and other daemons over systemd would be disingenuous. Systemd has the opposite trajectory, for one--it's becoming *more* monolithic, not less. Also, one can have LLVM/Clang and GCC installed and running at the same time without loss of functionality. This is not true for systemd versus any other init system, since there can be only one PID 1. -Jude On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 7:17 AM, devuan...@spamgourmet.net wrote: On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Jaromil - jaro...@dyne.org devuan.kn.0edf9dfcba.jaromil#dyne@ob.0sg.net wrote: On Mon, 23 Mar 2015, KatolaZ wrote: This sounds strange and new at the same time, since GCC was indeed designed to be portable and ported to several architectures since from the beginning. Do you have any quote by RMS or by any guy who has contributed to gcc to support your statement? I don't think that GCC is a hairball, to be honest. Oh, a hairball can be portable in its entirety:-) It is just hard to use parts of it. GCC was deliberately making things interdepend on each other, even without technical reasons, simply to prevent commercial entities to replace the e.g. front-end of the compiler with some proprietary code and then have that use the GPL backend. This would enable a new, proprietary language to leverage all the optimizations gcc has. So this prevents what Apple does with swift on llvm right now, and I understand the reasoning behind that decision, even though I regret it since it prevents us from having many valuable tools for code analysis and refactoring. https://lwn.net/Articles/629259/ covers the most recent flare-up when somebody wanted to make the AST of GCC accessible. This is not the first post in which this spamgourmet account is spreading FUD. We may need to react to this beyond argumenting. I don't see anything I said on this list to be related to be spreading Fear, Uncertainty or Doubt. I did argue for some of things I think are sensible, just like everybody else here. All of them can be implemented _without_ systemd (and I have or had them running that way). Yes, one of the ideas I like was first proposed by Lennart, but is this about building a new distribution or about holding a grudge? If it is the later, then you won't need to bother to ban me. ___ 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] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Mark R. White whit...@gmail.com wrote: Just to be clear: I've seen a lot of cross talk about the possibility of systemd being put into Devuan via a sandbox or even having the systemd API written in. Is it safe to assume that going forward that there will be no systemd in Devuan? Because if there is, I'm in the wrong place. +1 ___ 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 10:39:11PM +0100, devuan...@spamgourmet.net wrote: 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. This sounds strange and new at the same time, since GCC was indeed designed to be portable and ported to several architectures since from the beginning. Do you have any quote by RMS or by any guy who has contributed to gcc to support your statement? I don't think that GCC is a hairball, to be honest. It's instead one of the few truly modular compilers out there, and the proof is in the fact that it includes front-ends for more than a dozen languages and back-ends for variuos hundreds of different architectures RMS is a quite strange character to deal with, but saying that he was purposedly obfuscating GCC seems quite risible, to be honest My2Cents 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] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015, Nate Bargmann wrote: * On 2015 22 Mar 22:09 -0500, Peter Olson wrote: On March 22, 2015 at 6:29 AM Jaromil jaro...@dyne.org 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. That's one way, but how about the other, does he appreciate your POV or does he still consider the question to be trolling? On these regards Stefano wrote troll as action != troll as a person https://twitter.com/jaromil/status/579594919767064576 so he still considers the action of asking a systemd question to RMS to be trolling I think this is unacceptable under so many ways... some of which I've tried to explain. I'm also !flabbergasted! to see the discussion averted into the AST for GCC debacle with a touch of RMS bashing. Either someone is really missing the point of what is happening here, or really doesn't wants us to acknowledge that a Debian leader and OSI board member is acting this way, which I keep perceiving as bullying not only against an elderly member of our communities, but against anyone concerned. I think this situation says *a lot* about what has been going on in Debian's governance for the past, err, 4 years or so? including the dust-storm sweeping this thread, which is about a precise issue. And that is why - maybe wrongly so as Martijn points - I'm very nervous. ciao ___ 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 devuan.kn.ae5676beef.judecn#gmail@ob.0sg.net 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 Sat, 21 Mar 2015, Peter Olson wrote: On March 21, 2015 at 6:36 PM Robert Storey robert.sto...@gmail.com 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] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 2:34 AM, Joerg Reisenweber - reisenwe...@web.de devuan.kn.d76efe93d7.reisenweber#web...@ob.0sg.net 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 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
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
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
On March 22, 2015 at 6:29 AM Jaromil jaro...@dyne.org 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
Great reading. I knew RMS would answer something like that to that question, if it's licensed under GPL, it's free software, period. On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Nextime next...@nexlab.it wrote: On March 21, 2015 3:34:28 PM WET, Jaromil jaro...@dyne.org wrote: re all, perhaps interesting to perceive the atmosphere, no trolling intended and please consider we shall not fight, rather seek undersanding and claim respect and the right to have different opinions than the majority. At Libreplanet (the GNU/FSF conference) today someone (who?? thanks for that!) asked RMS about what he thinks of systemd. Few of us can afford to be there however from a twit by FSF member John Sullivan I apprehend the QA: @johns_FSF RMS, do you have an opinion about systemd? No. I know it's free software, so you can make your own opinion about it. #lp2015 follows up Stefano Zacchiroli (former Debian leader and present board member of OSI): @zacchiro achievement unlocked: #systemd troll brilliantly averted by rms during #libreplanet keynote a statement by a renown public speaker that clearly leads the public perception of someone making a question to RMS about systemd as being automatically a troll, just for the fact such a question is being asked. I've replied myself, via the @DevuanOrg twit account: is asking a question about #systemd now considered trolling? wow. #minculpop also later asking John: did someone explained how #Hurd is affected? https://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/open_issues/systemd.html … ...and uclibc etc. FWIW (no trolling intended) and I'm serious: I'd like to hear the *opinion* (which we are all free to have) of the GNU leaders on these matters, considering the aforementioned implications, which I'm not sure RMS has acknowledged. I understand perfectly RMS answer above which is rather sane: he is separating the power of his role in that particular moment (setting the ethical bar on free software for people listening) with the fact we can all have opinions. This is something a good leader should do, rather than bully somoene for making an uncomfortable question What I want to make here is an exortation to everyone reading: if we really think something needs to be done about systemd, please do your best in putting forward your opinion, avoiding to impose it or to aggressively wave it in front of everyone. If bullied please stand firmly by the right you have to have a different opinion and to debate it in the public. I think we need to state this because what Stefano and others are doing in this occasion is bullying people with different opinions, labeling them as trolls (and therefore enemies of the community) and ultimately denying there can even be a debate about systemd, spreading fear in anyone willing to debate it. I think this is totally unacceptable for a free society, that's why I label it as MinCulPop attitude, which ultimately was the fascist authority which established what can be debated, something Italians remember very well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Popular_Culture ciao -- Jaromil, Dyne.org Free Software Foundry (est. 2000) We are free to share code and we code to share freedom Web: https://j.dyne.org Contact: https://j.dyne.org/c.vcf GPG: 6113 D89C A825 C5CE DD02 C872 73B3 5DA5 4ACB 7D10 Confidential communications: https://keybase.io/jaromil ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng Standing ovation jaro! -- nextime ___ 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] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet
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 Regards, /Lars [1] http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/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
RMS stance is understandable, because he is also responsible for the current situation. He failed to predict it, and his dream is now turning into another Animal Farm, where some developers are becoming more equal than others (it's an open question if there was a better strategy possible when GPL was created). The biggest problem is that GPL needs symmetry to work. I give you my code, because I can take yours in return. But this symmetry breaks at some point, when there's more code than one person can really handle (or even read), and what eventually happens when corporations come into play. GPL can't really deal with it, because it wasn't designed for such possibility. We can safely assume that for corporations freedom is useless, and that they care only about money, so how currently they can earn them on GPL'ed software? By selling support, but this introduces conflict of interests and unavoidable pathology. Let me use a car analogy to explain why. Imagine you're giving away the cars and parts for them for free, hoping that you will earn money on servicing them. Is it in your interest to make them as trouble free, and as easy to setup and fix as possible, so that almost everyone could do that? No, because you won't earn any money then. Instead, by complicating the design to the maximum level (like the need to remove the whole engine just to change the lightbulb), and making it a fast moving target, you will make sure that only your mechanics will be able to fix it, and that it will need such fixing often. Now all that has left is to convince the most popular gas stations to have a fuel for your engineD only, and voila, mission accomplished (as a bonus you can also make some false promises like a quicker start, and full DIY compatibility, but that's only for true devilopers ;)). Sounds familiar? It's because developing and earning money on support only will always lead to such pathologies. And we are really responsible for this, in our best interest is to make sure that developers will earn money on writing free software, not on supporting it, otherwise it will be like fighting with the Hydra. ___ 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
[...all...] Sounds familiar? It's because developing and earning money on support only will always lead to such pathologies. [...] Full ACK Internet and downloading complete distros (for free) kills the Linux FOSS ecosystem now, like downloading mp3 music did kill the music ecosystem. Suse (and probably RH) had a fine working business model as long as they sold their CDs/DVDs incl booklet. Eventually that failed and OpenSuse got implemented (or Fedora). On a sidenote: SLE 12 is also systemd now - of course. /j 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 22 March 2015 00:40:45 Joerg Reisenweber wrote: kills the Linux FOSS ecosystem now, This time read ecosystem as economic system. The ecologic system aka community is probably still fine. RH just establishes the new better economic system: http://0pointer.net/blog/revisiting-how-we-put-together-linux-systems.html 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
Hi Jörg, I am going to get beaten for this, but that proposal is actually brilliant! Well, brilliant if you are not bothered by btrfs that is:-) But that is what I got backups for. While I do not care about all the sandboxing that got mixed into this, the rest got me really thinking about my setups. Splitting them into state (root:-subvolumes), distribution (usr:-subvolumes) and user data (home:-subvolumes) is a pretty damn powerful idea. I implemented that in the meantime for all my systems and it makes it so much simpler to play with different distros and settings. You should seriously consider to adopt that for devuan: It is a breeze to have several distro versions installed at the same time and switch between those at boot-time now. You do not even need a systemd-system for that! Just one that made sure all the distro-crap is in /usr and that is really easy to do with any distro and a couple of symlinks:-) Now all I need to do is make the PCs in the pool auto-reset to the last known good state on reboot by using a ram-based filesystem instead of the proposed root:-subvolume. That does not work too well with systemd or without at this time:-/ Best Regards, Karl PS: Don't come running with / is a minimal system with everything necessary to recover the rest. Been there done that for ages, but nowadays my initrd is that minimal system already. It has everything to fsck and mount stuff with all the relevant filesystems. There is no need to have another one loaded by the initrd. On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 12:52 AM, Joerg Reisenweber - reisenwe...@web.de devuan.kn.d76efe93d7.reisenweber#web...@ob.0sg.net wrote: On Sun 22 March 2015 00:40:45 Joerg Reisenweber wrote: kills the Linux FOSS ecosystem now, This time read ecosystem as economic system. The ecologic system aka community is probably still fine. RH just establishes the new better economic system: http://0pointer.net/blog/revisiting-how-we-put-together-linux-systems.html ___ 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] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet
On Sun 22 March 2015 01:15:18 devuan...@spamgourmet.net wrote: Hi Jörg, I am going to get beaten for this, but that proposal is actually brilliant! Well, brilliant if you are not bothered by btrfs that is:-) But that is what I got backups for. Besides me for one not liking the idea to *get* *forced* to use btrfs for /, my link rather was referring to statements like The classic Linux distribution scheme is frequently not what end users want, either. Many users are used to app markets like Android, Windows or iOS/Mac have. I'm not playing around with concurrent distros either, I'm absolutely happy with a single one that works and can get tailored to my needs by _me_ 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 1:23 AM, Joerg Reisenweber - reisenwe...@web.de devuan.kn.d76efe93d7.reisenweber#web...@ob.0sg.net wrote: Besides me for one not liking the idea to *get* *forced* to use btrfs for /, The only way not to be forcing anybody is to stick with the least common denominator for everything. That flat out stops progress. my link rather was referring to statements like The classic Linux distribution scheme is frequently not what end users want, either. Many users are used to app markets like Android, Windows or iOS/Mac have. As I said: I am not to excited about those apps either. I think sandboxing can be a security feature, but not while everything needs X11. Great software -- but only when you are safe to assume that everybody is nice to each other. We really need to get rid of that insecure crap! I'm not playing around with concurrent distros either, I'm absolutely happy with a single one that works and can get tailored to my needs by _me_ So am I, but I still like to be able to have different versions of my distro of choice. I do sometimes break things during an upgrade or during the tailoring:-) Maybe you are a better tailor than me, but I really enjoy the safety net. And yes, my systems are heavily tailored. How else would I be able to implement such a proposal? But you need to keep your eyes open for new ideas. And sometimes you find them in the most unexpected places:-) Best Regards, 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 Sun 22 March 2015 01:42:33 devuan...@spamgourmet.net wrote: On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Joerg Reisenweber - reisenwe...@web.de devuan.kn.d76efe93d7.reisenweber#web...@ob.0sg.net wrote: Besides me for one not liking the idea to *get* *forced* to use btrfs for /, The only way not to be forcing anybody is to stick with the least common denominator for everything. That flat out stops progress. 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. 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. 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. For your usecase: btrfs is around already, snapper is too, who needs those massive changes in packaging of a distro and file hierarchy? 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 March 21, 2015 at 11:34 AM Jaromil jaro...@dyne.org wrote: re all, perhaps interesting to perceive the atmosphere, no trolling intended and please consider we shall not fight, rather seek undersanding and claim respect and the right to have different opinions than the majority. At Libreplanet (the GNU/FSF conference) today someone (who?? thanks for that!) asked RMS about what he thinks of systemd. Few of us can afford to be there however from a twit by FSF member John Sullivan I apprehend the QA: That was me. I had previously searched the Web (and specifically the fsf.org/gnu.org sites) for anything he might have said about it and came up blank. I also asked one of the FSF campaigns people a week or so back about it and they didn't know of any statement he had made. RMS has a lot of opinions about things other than free software, so it occurs to me that he might have thought of some ethical concerns along the lines of what we have talked about here, but I was not about the get into any sort of argument with him about it. _That_ would be trolling. I stepped away from the microphone as soon as he answered. @johns_FSF RMS, do you have an opinion about systemd? No. I know it's free software, so you can make your own opinion about it. #lp2015 The exact quote is Do you have an opinion about the prevalence of systemd in most distributions? Peter Olson follows up Stefano Zacchiroli (former Debian leader and present board member of OSI): @zacchiro achievement unlocked: #systemd troll brilliantly averted by rms during #libreplanet keynote a statement by a renown public speaker that clearly leads the public perception of someone making a question to RMS about systemd as being automatically a troll, just for the fact such a question is being asked. I've replied myself, via the @DevuanOrg twit account: is asking a question about #systemd now considered trolling? wow. #minculpop also later asking John: did someone explained how #Hurd is affected? https://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/open_issues/systemd.html … ...and uclibc etc. FWIW (no trolling intended) and I'm serious: I'd like to hear the *opinion* (which we are all free to have) of the GNU leaders on these matters, considering the aforementioned implications, which I'm not sure RMS has acknowledged. I understand perfectly RMS answer above which is rather sane: he is separating the power of his role in that particular moment (setting the ethical bar on free software for people listening) with the fact we can all have opinions. This is something a good leader should do, rather than bully somoene for making an uncomfortable question What I want to make here is an exortation to everyone reading: if we really think something needs to be done about systemd, please do your best in putting forward your opinion, avoiding to impose it or to aggressively wave it in front of everyone. If bullied please stand firmly by the right you have to have a different opinion and to debate it in the public. I think we need to state this because what Stefano and others are doing in this occasion is bullying people with different opinions, labeling them as trolls (and therefore enemies of the community) and ultimately denying there can even be a debate about systemd, spreading fear in anyone willing to debate it. I think this is totally unacceptable for a free society, that's why I label it as MinCulPop attitude, which ultimately was the fascist authority which established what can be debated, something Italians remember very well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Popular_Culture ciao -- Jaromil, Dyne.org Free Software Foundry (est. 2000) We are free to share code and we code to share freedom Web: https://j.dyne.org Contact: https://j.dyne.org/c.vcf GPG: 6113 D89C A825 C5CE DD02 C872 73B3 5DA5 4ACB 7D10 Confidential communications: https://keybase.io/jaromil ___ 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] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet
On March 21, 2015 at 6:36 PM Robert Storey robert.sto...@gmail.com 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. Peter Olson Well, RMS doesn't do anymore development work as far as I know, so maybe his opinion doesn't matter. Still, as a well-known time-honored spokesperson for free software (I know he doesn't want us calling it open source) I would have expected better. Pity. cheers, Robert ___ 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
