Re: systemd bug closed - next steps?
On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 19:11:03 +0300
Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Lu, 22 sep 14, 21:17:28, Marty wrote:
> >
> > 1) The goal is "modular Debian." Multi-init is the means to achieve
> > it. Being tied to one init system is what caused Debian’s problems,
> > and the replacement did not fix it. A modular system has to support
> > all init systems, including systemd, clones and custom inits.
>
> While you're at it how about also making sure we can have a dietlibc
> or uClibc version of Debian? After all, depending on glibc is also
> not very good. Oh, and don't forget about udev and X.Org. There is
> already work in progress trying to compile Debian with something
> other than GCC, so you don't need to worry about that.
>
> Yes this is a joke, but only in part. It's very interesting how
> suddenly people are so worried about Debian being tied to one piece
> of software, while this has been happening all along.
Let's discuss your analogies...
=== Depending on glibc ===
True, it's a single point of failure, but it's made by GNU, whose
agenda is less harmful to Linux than the agenda of Redhat.
=== udev ===
Udev is one of the components that provide hot plugging. Take it out
and root needs to manually mount stuff. OK, that's a pain in the butt,
but it's limited. Most of us remember the days when you really had to
do a mount, as root, to read a thumb drive. Hassle? Yes. Comparable to
the invasiveness of a PID 1 whose most intimate details are necessary
to run the most mundane user apps? No.
=== X.org ===
First, no CLI program gives a flying flamingo about what GUI provider
is used: They don't access it. Systemd, on the other hand, has its
sticky little fingers in CLI and GUI alike. Second, by definition, a
GUI program must access GUI system software. There's no such definition
that CLI user identification must interact with part of PID 1's
package, nor that a GUI program know the intimate details of PID 1.
SteveT
Steve Litt * http://www.troubleshooters.com/
Troubleshooting Training * Human Performance
Reply to: