[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#727708: multiple init systems: We have to see it for what it is: Lennart/Linux OS. Not.

On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 6:20 PM, ChaosEsque Team
<chaosesqueteam@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Honestly. I, and many many many others, do NOT WANT SYSTEMD.
> We do not want to be forced or cajoled into using it.
> NOR do we want to be PUNISHED for not using it.
> "heheh yea you don't have to use it, but nothing will work on your system lolz hahhahah!"
> The systemd people seem to hate freedom and choice. They seem to be
> totalitarians. Why must we be forced to use their "software stack"
> Why do we have to accept their tendrils needlessly corrupting every
> free-software project that is at the "core" of Gnu/Linux?
Lets be clear here.   Many of us don't want sysvinit.  Sysvinit from
day one was junk.  Sysvinit has always been junk.

If debian was even changing to BSD shell script based init I would be
happier than staying with sysvinit.

The reality if you don't want to go systemd issues of Linux have to be
fixed.   Like being able to track what process started what process
without generating a horrible mess.   upstart ptracing everything is a
horrible solution to that problem..

There comes a point people need to be forced to act to deal with
issues they have not been fixing.

You are making the mistake thinking some of us supporting systemd are
against other options.   I am supporting systemd only because its
truly designed well.   Would I like to see upstart or openrc or some
other modern design init system able to battle against systemd yes I
would.   Would I like to have the option of using bsd init on Linux
yes I would.

Why the tendrils of systemd are going so far is building quality
controls over many features of the Linux kernel have been disregarded.
  Before systemd logind name another program that would wrap a user in
a cgroup in the login cleanly.   The answer is there is not one.

Systemd is so bad from a competition point of view because no other
init system before it has been stepping up to implement everything the
OS can do.

Openrc and upstart are two that have a possibility of stepping up and
fighting against systemd.

SMC on solaris tells as clearly if you don't have init systems that
support the kernel you are dead long term.  There were a stack of
cross platform init systems that use to support solaris a long time
ago that are no longer usable.

History if you don't learn from it you are doomed to Repeat it
ChaosEsque Team.  Everything you are saying are basically the same as
what solaris users said when Sun went SMC.

Step back ChaosEsque see that everything systemd is doing is not bad.
There are a lot of issues in sysvinit that should not be there.

The issue you are after is not really stopping systemd but putting the
systems in place that other init systems can still compete.   Some
like sysvinit just need to die due to being too defective to live.
Some like upstart need to fix a licensing issue and a method issue and
some like openrc need more time in development.

Systemd most likely will not remain the only choice for ever.   Short
time systemd will get some dominance due to lack of standards todo
particular things and lack of tools todo particular things.

Reply to: