Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by CoolHand on Saturday April 25 2015, @04:25AM   Printer-friendly
from the no-idea-what-a-vervet-is-and-ruh-roh-systemd dept.

Ubuntu 15.04 has now been released; full details are at: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/VividVervet/ReleaseNotes

Notable new features:
- Unity 7.3
- LibreOffice 4.4
- Firefox 37
- Chromium 41

Low-level and server changes include:
- Linux kernel 3.19
- The move from upstart to systemd
- A new version of OpenStack
- Ubuntu Core (Snappy) - a variant to be used as a core OS for other software projects

OMGubuntu coverage is here: http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2015/04/ubuntu-15-04-download-new-features
Slashdot commentary/griping at: http://news.slashdot.org/story/15/04/24/1245209/ubuntu-1504-released-first-version-to-feature-systemd

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @12:59PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @12:59PM (#175035)

    Jesus Christ. The point of me using a Linux distro is to make my life easier. If I have to jump through hoops like those just so the Linux installation boots reliably, then I'm no better off than if I was using Windows or some other OS. Fuck, I'd probably be better off not using Linux in this case!

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +2  
       Troll=1, Insightful=3, Total=4
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @06:42PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @06:42PM (#175120)
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @08:36PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @08:36PM (#175157)

      And they would be wrong. Booting is more important than security in the same sense that being born is more important than your ability to fight off an infection.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @09:41PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @09:41PM (#175173)

        Wait, you're claiming that Linux sans systemd doesn't boot?

        SysVinit and the other old-school init systems were merely accused of booting too slowly, leading to the primary reason claimed for needing the systemd infection. The non-booting systems [google.com] of late have actually been the ones using systemd.

  • (Score: 2, Disagree) by Marand on Sunday April 26 2015, @01:04AM

    by Marand (1081) on Sunday April 26 2015, @01:04AM (#175210) Journal

    It seems obvious to me that you're just trolling, but I'll bite anyway, since a couple people seem to think your trolling is "insightful".

    • Systemd does work well enough for a majority of users and use-cases, especially desktop ones. For most people it will just work. There will be niche cases where something goes wrong, but that's nothing new for Linux, or even Windows, where system hardware and software combinations can vary wildly.

    This isn't much different than booting to GPU issues that prevent proper startup or any other number of similar problems that can occur. If you absolutely cannot accept that these things happen sometimes, then you should probably stick to OS X with its limited hardware choice, and replace the entire system any time it's necessary to do an OS upgrade.

    If you really want Linux-sans-risks, take the Apple-esque route and buy from a Linux vendor. They'll do the work of making sure the system boots with the hardware configuration they sell, the same way Apple does.

    • For a server use-case without desktop components, removing systemd should be similar to any other software change. Anybody running a server is already likely to be changing settings, removing preinstalled software, and adding new. Removing systemd if you're opposed to it or it's troublesome isn't a huge burden in this scenario

    • For a desktop user, yes, it's an annoying extra step. However, most users don't care unless it breaks. Once something breaks, anything to fix it is going to be obnoxious extra work. For this group, systemd failing to boot isn't going to be any worse than a GPU driver issue causing X to crash: both result in either "shit, better check google" or "fuck this, back to Windows".

    • I was providing information and caveats for different use cases in a single post; the actual change required to switch out systemd for people that don't want it (like myself) varies, but generally isn't that difficult. The most complicated case is the extreme ideological "I want no part of this on my system, even the inoffensive non-init bits". For anybody else it's basically just "uninstall this package, install this package instead, good to go."

    • If you're just philosophically opposed to systemd for some reason -- which you probably are, or you wouldn't be spending so much time with the systemd trolling -- you've already decided you're willing to "jump through hoops" for your principles. Regardless of whether you're switching distros, purging systemd, or changing OSes, you've already decided you're willing to be inconvenienced to ditch it.

    This is not really any different than why many people use Linux. It's not something you get preinstalled usually (and if you do, you have to put effort into finding a Linux hardware vendor), so by choosing to use it you already made a choice to put some extra effort into your OS use for some practical or ideological reason that outweighs the inconvenience.

    ---

    Finally, just to be clear, I'm not a fan of systemd, especially the init and logging parts, but I also see no reason to take a sky-is-falling approach and pretend it suddenly makes all distros unbootable and unusable. I'm avoiding the init part for now because I have my own problems with it -- which is why I know how to remove it and share that info with others that want it -- but I don't mind its existence.

    Multiple init systems allows exploration of new ideas, and in time the bad parts get culled while the good ideas get shared amongst them. The problem is when it becomes impossible to use alternatives at all, but that's not currently the case, at least in Debian.

    Likewise, the BSD-style userland suite isn't necessarily a bad idea, I'm just not convinced it's necessary, or ready for widespread adoption just yet.

    • (Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 26 2015, @02:06AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 26 2015, @02:06AM (#175221)

      Wrong.