On 09/17/2014 08:11 PM, Richard Pieri wrote:
On 9/17/2014 1:10 PM, Richard Pieri wrote:
This may fail if you're using Multipath I/O. [...]
Additionally, I can confirm that it does not work if you are using any
of the desktop environments supported by Debian. They all (as far as I
know) depend
On 9/17/2014 1:10 PM, Richard Pieri wrote:
> This may fail if you're using Multipath I/O. [...]
Additionally, I can confirm that it does not work if you are using any
of the desktop environments supported by Debian. They all (as far as I
know) depend on policykit-1 which now has a hard dependency
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Richard Pieri wrote:
>> For those who agree that systemd is the devil's spawn how do we proceed
>> to change things?
> Switch to Windows[1] and inform your Linux vendor that you've switched
> because of systemd.
> [1] Or Gentoo or Slackware or *BSD or Plan 9/Infe
On 9/17/2014 12:33 PM, Michael Tiernan wrote:
> For those who agree that systemd is the devil's spawn how do we proceed
> to change things?
Switch to Windows[1] and inform your Linux vendor that you've switched
because of systemd.
[1] Or Gentoo or Slackware or *BSD or Plan 9/Inferno.
--
Rich P.
On 9/17/2014 2:04 PM, Bill Ricker wrote:
> Heh, Multipath i/o can break almost anything, but particularly when in
> error cases.
Apologies if I was unclear: it's not Multipath I/O that may break; it's
the procedure for disabling systemd in favor of sysvinit that may break
if multipath-tools is ins
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Richard Pieri wrote:
> This may fail if you're using Multipath I/O.
Heh, Multipath i/o can break almost anything, but particularly when in
error cases.
Subtle interactions between bugs in different layers that aren't
*singly* a problem but ... are really hard to
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 01:10:57PM -0400, Richard Pieri wrote:
> On 9/17/2014 12:45 PM, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > # apt-get install sysv-rc sysvinit-core sysvinit-utils
> >
> > edit /etc/udev/udev.conf to log at err or higher
> >
> > # update-initramfs -k all -u
> >
> > and reboot.
>
> This may fai
On 9/17/2014 12:45 PM, Dan Ritter wrote:
> # apt-get install sysv-rc sysvinit-core sysvinit-utils
>
> edit /etc/udev/udev.conf to log at err or higher
>
> # update-initramfs -k all -u
>
> and reboot.
This may fail if you're using Multipath I/O. r...@debian.org changed
multipath-tools' dependenc
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 12:33:47PM -0400, Michael Tiernan wrote:
> Okay everyone. All this bitching is fun and at times entertaining but
> it's produced little more than noise.
>
> For those who agree that systemd is the devil's spawn how do we proceed
> to change things?
For Debian stable releas
Okay everyone. All this bitching is fun and at times entertaining but
it's produced little more than noise.
For those who agree that systemd is the devil's spawn how do we proceed
to change things?
For those who think systemd is a great implementation, how do you
educate us to get us out from und
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Bill Bogstad wrote:
> a trend
> away from debugging problems and towards just doing reinstalls/restarts. I
> think the rise of virtualization (particularly in the cloud) has
> driven this. As the
> tools make it easier and easier to spin up a new VM, why bothe
Bill Bogstad writes:
> I tend to think that way as well, but I have been noticing what I
> think is a trend
> away from debugging problems and towards just doing reinstalls/restarts. I
...
> Unfortunately, I think the skills to do this are no longer being developed
> among
> new people. Hopef
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 7:26 PM, Richard Pieri wrote:
> On 9/13/2014 9:28 AM, Edward Ned Harvey (blu) wrote:
>> But if you want to create something new, the ability to daemonize
>> any-random-command is a really nice convenience factor; you just
>> write any simple console application or shell scr
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Richard Pieri wrote:
> Any
> random console tool /can't/ act the same as a daemon and as a console
> tool. UNIX and Linux don't work that way.
Yes, making legacy programs work in modern lights-out headless
virtualization farms is hard.
Having built wrapper script
On 9/13/2014 9:28 AM, Edward Ned Harvey (blu) wrote:
> But if you want to create something new, the ability to daemonize
> any-random-command is a really nice convenience factor; you just
> write any simple console application or shell script, and it behaves
> exactly the same on your command termi
If anyone hasn't had enough of SystemD debate ...
G+ has
a SysVinit - SystemD command crib sheet
https://plus.google.com/u/0/116824676284814557701/posts/4Quj7FGTBBD
a full debate and index to blogs elsewhere on topic
https://plus.google.com/u/0/explore/Systemd
On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 9:28 AM,
> From: discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org [mailto:discuss-
> bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org] On Behalf Of Mike Small
>
> "systemd handles a lot of annoying infrastructure for you; for example,
> you do not have to arrange to daemonize programs you run."
>
> I don't understand this at a
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 12:07:29PM -0400, Mike Small wrote:
> "systemd handles a lot of annoying infrastructure for you; for example,
> you do not have to arrange to daemonize programs you run."
>
> I don't understand this at all. Aren't daemons written as daemons
> (giving up controlling terminal
On 9/11/14 11:57 AM, Mike Small wrote:
> I guess it can't lazy load dbus since it's intertwined with that (so much
> it so that it wants it in the kernel -- as my son says... what the?)
I've always been irked by the overly complex interdependencies that have
been getting more and more introduced in
On 9/11/14 11:46 AM, Bill Ricker wrote:
> I wonder which "makers of grep" added -r ?
While my opinion isn't worth the electrons it uses, all through out my
time behind the keyboard, I've learned that the KISS principle is the
best way to survive.
I had a set of scripts that were written for use on
On 9/12/2014 12:07 PM, Mike Small wrote:
> I don't understand this at all. Aren't daemons written as daemons
> (giving up controlling terminal and whatever else within their own
> code).
"Daemonizing" in this context is the support around starting, stopping,
and querying the status of daemon progr
On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 12:07:29 -0400, Mike Small wrote:
> Some of the points in the latter seem only to apply when comparing with
> upstart. Comparing to rc or sysvinit scripts, the points that seem relevant
> are these:
>
> "systemd handles a lot of annoying infrastructure for you; for example,
> y
Bill Ricker writes:
> I found one blog that seems to have a history of level-headed advocacy
> for systemd without insulting people or SysV Init (says it isn't badly
> broken). It's not by a SystemD DEV but by a working sysadmin.
>
> http://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/linux/SystemdWhyItWon?s
> From: discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org [mailto:discuss-
> bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org] On Behalf Of Rich Braun
>
> But upon reflection, I'm not quite sure which one is the terrorist, which one
> is the defender of liberty, and which one is the neutral bystander: sysV
> init, upst
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Mike Small wrote:
> 5. I'm yet to see anyone convincingly defend systemd. Some of the
> critiques are quite overheated, but the "myths debunked" always read as
> bald face advocacy
I found one blog that seems to have a history of level-headed advocacy
for system
On 9/11/2014 6:19 PM, Rich Braun wrote:
> But upon reflection, I'm not quite sure which one is the terrorist, which one
> is the defender of liberty, and which one is the neutral bystander: sysV
> init, upstart, or systemd?
The problem with this question is that it's the same loaded question
that
Someone noted:
> I'm yet to see anyone convincingly defend systemd.
I love a good Linux religious debate, er, war. It's a great way to celebrate
the 13th anniversary of 9/11: Linux and SysV init are now 13 years older (as
are each of us), we're still fighting the "terrorists" and the jihadis are
On 9/11/2014 2:41 PM, Bill Ricker wrote:
> That's certainly part of it, but I'm hearing SysAdmins are divided on
> SystemD's replace-all-the-things mission-creep too.
I suppose we'd be less divided about systemd if it weren't the biggest
pile of bloat most of us have ever seen. I look at systemd's
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Mike Small wrote:
> This is kind of what I think the systemd soap opera is at least partly
> about, this split of user category.
That's certainly part of it, but I'm hearing SysAdmins are divided on
SystemD's replace-all-the-things mission-creep too.
Maybe more
Bill Ricker writes:
> Hmm. Interesting. Yes, small might be good.
> Are any Distros including dmd with/instead of rc/init/... ?
Dmd was created by Ludovic Courtès, one of the guile maintainers, I
believe to go with his guix packaging system (instead of any other init
system), which fairly recentl
Bill Ricker writes:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:10 PM, Mike Small wrote:
>> I wouldn't call Slackware fringe. Maybe that's just me.
>
> From point of view of history, it's certainly core to the evolution of
> our culture. Instant street cred at LUG meetings if you run Slack (or
> Gentoo).
>
>
On 9/11/2014 12:08 PM, Bill Ricker wrote:
> I wonder who will be the first to fork a sysvinit/syslog/... on an
> unofficial Gnu/Linux variant of Debian, using the Debian BSD/Hurd
> maintained versions of the legacy daemons, and if it will gain any
> traction.
Probably not. The vast majority of Lin
> 1. The major advertised advantage seems to be boot time. Well, my way of
> starting up involves turning on the computer and then looking for my
> glasses. ...
:-)
Agreed. Even though my laptop boots not suspends, it's good enough now.
And until recently, we prided ourselves on our average uptim
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:10 PM, Mike Small wrote:
> I wouldn't call Slackware fringe. Maybe that's just me.
>From point of view of history, it's certainly core to the evolution of
our culture. Instant street cred at LUG meetings if you run Slack (or
Gentoo).
>From a commercial/IT usage point
Bill Ricker writes:
> Can we agree that SysV Init is ancient, and is due for at least major
> reform, if not outright replacement ?
Nope. Unless you mean adapting OpenBSD's rc scripts as the major reform
or re-writing in (Tom Duff's) rc or scsh. I've expanded on why that
suits my preferences at
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Richard Pieri wrote:
> Ancient? Yes.
>
> Due for reform? Maybe. Depends on whether or not you consider lumping
> device management, system logging and superserver into the init system
> qualifies. I for one do not.
Yeah, I don't see how SysV init being slow / sti
Tom Metro writes:
> http://www.infoworld.com/print/248950
>
> Mike Gancarz sums up the Unix philosophy: 1. Small is beautiful. 2.
> Make each program do one thing well. ... We have built the Internet
> and all modern Internet services on those principles. Systemd's design
> and implementa
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Edward Ned Harvey (blu)
wrote:
> 1- For example, you can do something like
> "find somedir -type f -exec grep -l somestring {} \;"
> and this adheres to the above principles ...
> So then the makers of grep realized they're getting thousands of new
> processes spa
> From: Dan Ritter [mailto:d...@randomstring.org]
> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 9:31 AM
>
> Nope. I'm telling you that I perceive systemd "guys" as being
> arrogant, hubristic, and competitive instead of cooperative...
>
> and now I'll tell you that you're not doing anything to change
> th
On 9/11/2014 10:58 AM, Bill Ricker wrote:
> Can we agree that SysV Init is ancient, and is due for at least major
> reform, if not outright replacement ?
Ancient? Yes.
Due for reform? Maybe. Depends on whether or not you consider lumping
device management, system logging and superserver into the
Can we agree that SysV Init is ancient, and is due for at least major
reform, if not outright replacement ?
There have been several boot acceleration / init rationalization
attempts recently.
Some have been init reform. Efforts to reform Init with automagic
learning for parallelizing of boot orde
On 9/11/2014 7:32 AM, Dan Ritter wrote:
> . systemd does not play well with others
Minor correction: systemd does not play /at all/ with others. It is
exclusive, thus proprietary, to the Linux API. Which doesn't say much
good about software with hard dependencies on systemd. Like, say, GNOME
3.8 a
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 01:06:33PM +, Edward Ned Harvey (blu) wrote:
> > From: discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org [mailto:discuss-
> > bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org] On Behalf Of Dan Ritter
> >
> > . Monoculture is bad
> >
> > . systemd does not play well with others
> >
> > . sys
> From: discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org [mailto:discuss-
> bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org] On Behalf Of Dan Ritter
>
> . Monoculture is bad
>
> . systemd does not play well with others
>
> . systemd advocates act as if There Can Only Be One and so they
> must win at any cost
I se
> From: discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org [mailto:discuss-
> bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org] On Behalf Of Tom Metro
>
> Mike Gancarz sums up the Unix philosophy: 1. Small is beautiful. 2.
> Make each program do one thing well. ...
Ok, I'm just going to start by naming a few situat
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I have not run into Mike for a number of years since Digital transferred
him to Atlanta. BTW: "Small is Beautiful" is really part of the
long-time Unix Philosophy developed by Ken Thompson and written about by
Brian Khernigan. Also, Chuck Moore invent
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 10:14:39PM -0400, Tom Metro wrote:
> Opinions?
In short:
. Monoculture is bad
. systemd does not play well with others
. systemd advocates act as if There Can Only Be One and so they
must win at any cost
I see a link between my second and third points: systemd tries t
Stephen Adler wrote:
> ...it's actually
> quite good, in my opinion. It makes it possible to boot your system much
> faster by bringing up
> services in parallel.
I haven't looked at how systemd is implemented yet, much less lived with
it, but one thing that caught my eye in the article was the de
I just finished upgrading to rhel 7 which is based on systemd and it was
the first time
I really paid attention to it. (With my fedora installs, I've basically
done the most minimal
configuration and having to work with systemd was done only on as
totally need basis.)
At first it seems dumb an
That seems to be the guiding philosophy of the Gnome3 development team:
throw away and rewrite anything in Linux that's mature and robust, because
it doesn't have that new car smell!
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 10:14 PM, Tom Metro wrote:
> http://www.infoworld.com/print/248950
>
> Mike Gancarz sum
http://www.infoworld.com/print/248950
Mike Gancarz sums up the Unix philosophy: 1. Small is beautiful. 2.
Make each program do one thing well. ... We have built the Internet
and all modern Internet services on those principles. Systemd's design
and implementation violates nearly all of the
51 matches
Mail list logo
