Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
Le 14/04/2020 à 15:49, Ottavio Caruso a écrit : On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 12:06, Oddmund G. wrote: Since the ongoing corporate takeover of GNU+Linux, GNU, whether we like them or not, have not been and will not be taken over by "corporate", as long as Stallman is alive. As for Linux, it is not an OS but just a kernel. The only distros that has been taken over by "corporate" are Red Hat (but it was annoyingly corporate-friendly even before it was bought by IBM) and SuSE. The remaining have not been taken over by "corporate" if they wanted to. Cheap digs don't usually get the facts right. I know all this, Ottavio. I have been using GNU+Linux since 1994 after several years with Ultrix/VMS/OpenVMS @DEC: Slackware in the beginning, then Debian until the forced introduction of systemd and the rest of the crap being considered as 'much better' and 'mandatory'. Even FSF has swallowed this, because systemd is 'free software', Trisquel being Ubuntu-based adopted it as if nothing had happened or they probably thougfht they had no choice. Stallman pissed in his pants and is not relevant any more. Corporate takeovers does not happen overnight and there are some resistance. 60-70 Linux 'distributions' are still using non-systemd inits. The problem is that the 'big' core distributions are being streamlined to be 'compatible' with 'New Linu$'. Micro$oft became a member of the Linu$ Foundation almost four years ago. I strongly believe that it was not for 'fun'... Linux is doomed. Closer 'integration' of systemd, pulseaudio, wayland ++. with other system components will make it very difficult, if not impossible to continue resisting and keeping up alternative GNU+Linux development in the future. This was one of the reasons why I switched to OpenBSD a couple of years ago. I tried it for a while by the end of the '90s, but it wasn't adapted to what I was doing at that time, so I switched back to Debian. Now I am retired and it is absolutely perfect! Thank you Theo & all the other guys & girls keeping it alive and kickin'! Cheers, Oddmund
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
Amen to all that. Arch Linux worked for me for many years, but the Arch philosophy of adopting bleeding edge software has become increasingly difficult to deal with, given the corporate takeover of Linux. Started out with BSD in the early days, moved to Slackware, Debian, and then Arch. Finally got fed up and explored the major BSD derivatives and OpenBSD was the only one I found where things just work (most of the time!). Kudos to Theo and everybody involved. I try to help where I can, though my abilities and time are limited even in retirement. Dave On 4/14/20, Oddmund G. wrote: > Le 14/04/2020 à 15:49, Ottavio Caruso a écrit : >> On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 12:06, Oddmund G. wrote: >>> Since the ongoing corporate takeover of GNU+Linux, >> GNU, whether we like them or not, have not been and will not be taken >> over by "corporate", as long as Stallman is alive. >> >> As for Linux, it is not an OS but just a kernel. The only distros that >> has been taken over by "corporate" are Red Hat (but it was annoyingly >> corporate-friendly even before it was bought by IBM) and SuSE. The >> remaining have not been taken over by >> "corporate" if they wanted to. >> >> Cheap digs don't usually get the facts right. >> > I know all this, Ottavio. I have been using GNU+Linux since 1994 after > several years with Ultrix/VMS/OpenVMS @DEC: Slackware in the beginning, > then Debian until the forced introduction of systemd and the rest of the > crap being considered as 'much better' and 'mandatory'. > > Even FSF has swallowed this, because systemd is 'free software', > Trisquel being Ubuntu-based adopted it as if nothing had happened or > they probably thougfht they had no choice. Stallman pissed in his pants > and is not relevant any more. > > Corporate takeovers does not happen overnight and there are some > resistance. 60-70 Linux 'distributions' are still using non-systemd > inits. The problem is that the 'big' core distributions are being > streamlined to be 'compatible' with 'New Linu$'. Micro$oft became a > member of the Linu$ Foundation almost four years ago. I strongly believe > that it was not for 'fun'... > > Linux is doomed. Closer 'integration' of systemd, pulseaudio, wayland > ++. with other system components will make it very difficult, if not > impossible to continue resisting and keeping up alternative GNU+Linux > development in the future. This was one of the reasons why I switched to > OpenBSD a couple of years ago. I tried it for a while by the end of the > '90s, but it wasn't adapted to what I was doing at that time, so I > switched back to Debian. > > Now I am retired and it is absolutely perfect! Thank you Theo & all the > other guys & girls keeping it alive and kickin'! > > Cheers, > > Oddmund > > -- David J. Raymond david.raym...@nmt.edu http://physics.nmt.edu/~raymond
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
Le 14/04/2020 à 17:10, Oddmund G. a écrit : Linux is doomed. Closer 'integration' of systemd, pulseaudio, wayland Wayland isn't that bad. It solves many things by reducing the display complexity and is much faster than X.Org. The real problem is by being simple; many compositors (~= window managers) started to implement their own drawing API leading in many effort duplication. with other system components will make it very difficult, if not impossible to continue resisting and keeping up alternative GNU+Linux development in the future. This was one of the reasons why I switched to OpenBSD a couple of years ago. I'm also loving OpenBSD for its simplicity but unable to use it as a daily driver because of hardware support so I have a dualboot with Alpine Linux which I could recommend for people who love simplicity and elegance but can't stick with OpenBSD yet. Note that not all distributions are based on GNU and so for this naming GNU+Linux or GNU/Linux should not be used anymore. Now I am retired and it is absolutely perfect! Thank you Theo & all the other guys & girls keeping it alive and kickin'! Could not agree more. I wish I could contribute to kernel code but I'm far from a hardware developer :). -- David
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 05:10:14PM +0200, Oddmund G. wrote: > I know all this, Ottavio. I have been using GNU+Linux since 1994 after > several years with Ultrix/VMS/OpenVMS @DEC: Slackware in the beginning, then > Debian until the forced introduction of systemd and the rest of the crap > being considered as 'much better' and 'mandatory'. Because systemd is good enough "base tools suite". Think of it as a base system like OpenBSD provides. It has a _lot_ of issues with reliability, consistency and whatever, but simply put, other Linux folks failed to provide similar tools. Maybe someday someone will make something better.
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
There are IMHO a few of good systemD free Linux distros: Devuan - Debian without systemD Parabola - Arch without systemD Alpine unfortunately lacks verification of checksums of earlier installed files. Like wajig integrity (debsums) in Devuan. More info about verification: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacman/Rosetta#Verification_and_repair
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 1:37 PM Consus wrote: > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 05:10:14PM +0200, Oddmund G. wrote: > > I know all this, Ottavio. I have been using GNU+Linux since 1994 after > > several years with Ultrix/VMS/OpenVMS @DEC: Slackware in the beginning, then > > Debian until the forced introduction of systemd and the rest of the crap > > being considered as 'much better' and 'mandatory'. > > Because systemd is good enough "base tools suite". Think of it as a base > system like OpenBSD provides. It has a _lot_ of issues with reliability, > consistency and whatever, but simply put, other Linux folks failed to > provide similar tools. Maybe someday someone will make something better. I think that thinking of it this way would be some kind of mistake: Last I checked, systemd was not modular, was poorly documented, exhibited incompatibilities with basically all historical interfaces, and had introduced a variety of boot-time race conditions (which mostly hit people who tried to change the configuration from the default). These are all solvable problems, but OpenBSD is not the only distribution which suffers from a lack of competent contributions. I don't think Linux is particularly doomed -- computer systems tend to stick around far longer than most sales pitches would have you believe. But these are concerning issues. But that's also why these sorts of discussions tend to be fairly worthless. While there are attractive things (for some use cases) about systemd, the likelihood of a competent port to OpenBSD (which addresses the above listed problems) isn't something anyone is volunteering for. It would be a lot of work -- possibly a complete rewrite and more work than anyone has put into systemd to date. -- Raul
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 03:12:18PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote: > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 1:37 PM Consus wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 05:10:14PM +0200, Oddmund G. wrote: > > > I know all this, Ottavio. I have been using GNU+Linux since 1994 after > > > several years with Ultrix/VMS/OpenVMS @DEC: Slackware in the beginning, > > > then > > > Debian until the forced introduction of systemd and the rest of the crap > > > being considered as 'much better' and 'mandatory'. > > > > Because systemd is good enough "base tools suite". Think of it as a base > > system like OpenBSD provides. It has a _lot_ of issues with reliability, > > consistency and whatever, but simply put, other Linux folks failed to > > provide similar tools. Maybe someday someone will make something better. > > I think that thinking of it this way would be some kind of mistake: > > Last I checked, systemd was not modular, was poorly documented, > exhibited incompatibilities with basically all historical interfaces, > and had introduced a variety of boot-time race conditions (which > mostly hit people who tried to change the configuration from the > default). These are all solvable problems, but OpenBSD is not the only > distribution which suffers from a lack of competent contributions. It is modular to a degree, but separating services requires a bit of work so yeah, in this area systemd sucks. Documentation is pretty good though. I don't like the complexity of the thing, but I've never been stuck because there is not enough docs. Can't say much about historical interfaces. > I don't think Linux is particularly doomed -- computer systems tend to > stick around far longer than most sales pitches would have you > believe. But these are concerning issues. Systemd actually solved a bunch of problems so I don't think it's bad or makes Linux "doomed". > But that's also why these sorts of discussions tend to be fairly > worthless. Of course they are. Just a chit-chat.
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 3:38 PM Consus wrote: > It is modular to a degree, but separating services requires a bit of > work so yeah, in this area systemd sucks. Documentation is pretty good > though. I don't like the complexity of the thing, but I've never been > stuck because there is not enough docs. Got any good docs on how to debug (or monitor) D-Bus issues? Thanks, -- Raul
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 04:05:56PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote: > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 3:38 PM Consus wrote: > > It is modular to a degree, but separating services requires a bit of > > work so yeah, in this area systemd sucks. Documentation is pretty good > > though. I don't like the complexity of the thing, but I've never been > > stuck because there is not enough docs. > > Got any good docs on how to debug (or monitor) D-Bus issues? Sure, try busctl(1).
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 16:05:56 -0400, Raul Miller wrote: > Got any good docs on how to debug (or monitor) D-Bus issues? You're asking help to debug D-Bus on an OpenBSD mailing list? Why don't you bring this sooo interesting discussion off-list?
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 04:15:20PM -0400, Daniel Jakots wrote: > On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 16:05:56 -0400, Raul Miller > wrote: > > > Got any good docs on how to debug (or monitor) D-Bus issues? > > You're asking help to debug D-Bus on an OpenBSD mailing list? Why don't > you bring this sooo interesting discussion off-list? OpenBSD has D-Bus too, nah?
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
What the hell does this have to do with OpenBSD? i...@aulix.com wrote: > There are IMHO a few of good systemD free Linux distros: > Devuan - Debian without systemD > Parabola - Arch without systemD > > Alpine unfortunately lacks verification of checksums of earlier installed > files. > > Like wajig integrity (debsums) in Devuan. > > More info about verification: > https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacman/Rosetta#Verification_and_repair >
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
What does this have to do with OpenBSD? Raul Miller wrote: > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 1:37 PM Consus wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 05:10:14PM +0200, Oddmund G. wrote: > > > I know all this, Ottavio. I have been using GNU+Linux since 1994 after > > > several years with Ultrix/VMS/OpenVMS @DEC: Slackware in the beginning, > > > then > > > Debian until the forced introduction of systemd and the rest of the crap > > > being considered as 'much better' and 'mandatory'. > > > > Because systemd is good enough "base tools suite". Think of it as a base > > system like OpenBSD provides. It has a _lot_ of issues with reliability, > > consistency and whatever, but simply put, other Linux folks failed to > > provide similar tools. Maybe someday someone will make something better. > > I think that thinking of it this way would be some kind of mistake: > > Last I checked, systemd was not modular, was poorly documented, > exhibited incompatibilities with basically all historical interfaces, > and had introduced a variety of boot-time race conditions (which > mostly hit people who tried to change the configuration from the > default). These are all solvable problems, but OpenBSD is not the only > distribution which suffers from a lack of competent contributions. > > I don't think Linux is particularly doomed -- computer systems tend to > stick around far longer than most sales pitches would have you > believe. But these are concerning issues. > > But that's also why these sorts of discussions tend to be fairly > worthless. While there are attractive things (for some use cases) > about systemd, the likelihood of a competent port to OpenBSD (which > addresses the above listed problems) isn't something anyone is > volunteering for. It would be a lot of work -- possibly a complete > rewrite and more work than anyone has put into systemd to date. > > -- > Raul >
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 22:38:00 +0300 Consus wrote: > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 03:12:18PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote: > > last I checked, systemd was not modular, was poorly documented, > > exhibited incompatibilities with basically all historical > > interfaces, and had introduced a variety of boot-time race > > conditions (which mostly hit people who tried to change the > > configuration from the default). These are all solvable problems, > > but OpenBSD is not the only distribution which suffers from a lack > > of competent contributions. > > It is modular to a degree, but separating services requires a bit of Here's the degree to which systemd is modular: http://troubleshooters.com/linux/systemd/lol_systemd.htm SteveT Steve Litt March 2020 featured book: Troubleshooting: Why Bother? http://www.troubleshooters.com/twb
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
What does this have to do with OpenBSD? Steve Litt wrote: > On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 22:38:00 +0300 > Consus wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 03:12:18PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote: > > > last I checked, systemd was not modular, was poorly documented, > > > exhibited incompatibilities with basically all historical > > > interfaces, and had introduced a variety of boot-time race > > > conditions (which mostly hit people who tried to change the > > > configuration from the default). These are all solvable problems, > > > but OpenBSD is not the only distribution which suffers from a lack > > > of competent contributions. > > > > It is modular to a degree, but separating services requires a bit of > > Here's the degree to which systemd is modular: > > http://troubleshooters.com/linux/systemd/lol_systemd.htm > > SteveT > > Steve Litt > March 2020 featured book: Troubleshooting: Why Bother? > http://www.troubleshooters.com/twb >
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
On 04/14/2020 04:22 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote: > What the hell does this have to do with OpenBSD? > > Probably it has nothing to do with OpenBSD, since they are no longer talking about wine for OpenBSD. But yeah, I for one am glad you take up the K.I.S.S way of doing things. Linux is a beast that is going to crush itself someday. Not due to being libre, but because its so overengineered that its complexity will kill it.
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
Well just to correct myself, seeming libre. It isn't actually that much more libre than OpenBSD. On 04/14/2020 05:54 PM, zap wrote: > > On 04/14/2020 04:22 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote: >> What the hell does this have to do with OpenBSD? >> >> > Probably it has nothing to do with OpenBSD, since they are no longer > talking about wine for OpenBSD. > > But yeah, I for one am glad you take up the K.I.S.S way of doing things. > > Linux is a beast that is going to crush itself someday. Not due to being > libre, but because its so overengineered that its complexity will kill it.
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
What do thsi have to with OpenBSD? zap wrote: > Well just to correct myself, seeming libre. It isn't actually that much > more libre than OpenBSD. > > > On 04/14/2020 05:54 PM, zap wrote: > > > > On 04/14/2020 04:22 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote: > >> What the hell does this have to do with OpenBSD? > >> > >> > > Probably it has nothing to do with OpenBSD, since they are no longer > > talking about wine for OpenBSD. > > > > But yeah, I for one am glad you take up the K.I.S.S way of doing things. > > > > Linux is a beast that is going to crush itself someday. Not due to being > > libre, but because its so overengineered that its complexity will kill it. >
Re: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
What does this have to do with OpenBSD? zap wrote: > > > > On 04/14/2020 04:22 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > What the hell does this have to do with OpenBSD? > > > > > Probably it has nothing to do with OpenBSD, since they are no longer > talking about wine for OpenBSD. > > But yeah, I for one am glad you take up the K.I.S.S way of doing things. > > Linux is a beast that is going to crush itself someday. Not due to being > libre, but because its so overengineered that its complexity will kill it. >
RE: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?
theo wrote: > What do thsi have to with OpenBSD? Drat. Someone discovered The Homoheterothropic Society for the Intermezzanic! Mesupposes we'll have to disband. --zeur. -- Friggin' Machines!
passive-aggressive questions (was: RE: GNU+Linux corporate takeover, was: Wine for OpenBSD?)
theo wrote: > What does this have to do with OpenBSD? Alright, let's talk about leadership. Do you folks think Linus is a better leader than Theo here? There, OpenBSD angle restored. (Yes, medoes wish that discussion about lunix et al. be toned down. Even so, mealso wishes that the passive-aggressive behaviour that theo just displayed here would stop.) Love && cuddles, --zeurkous. P.S.: Be careful what you wish for. -- Friggin' Machines!
