posted by
CoolHand
on Saturday April 25 2015, @04:25AM
from the no-idea-what-a-vervet-is-and-ruh-roh-systemd dept.
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This discussion has been archived.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.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: 2) by SubiculumHammer on Saturday April 25 2015, @04:56AM
System M isn't a notable "new feature"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @01:09PM
"The solution is Devuan."
Hahahahahahahahaha! LOL! LOL! LOL! Hahahahahahahhahahahhahahaha! LOL! Hahahahah! LOL! LOL! Hahahahahahahahahaahahahahah! LOL LOL LOL! Hahahahahahahahahhahahhahahaha! LOL!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @01:28PM
To paraphrase a famous song from years gone by,
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Saturday April 25 2015, @05:03AM
What major Linux distros haven't (yet) been conquered? OpenSUSE, Slackware, and Gentoo? Seems OpenSUSE will soon fall.
I thought Ubuntu was going to buck the trend, invest their resources in their Upstart alternative.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @05:43AM
This is now officially shitful. Work is looking at the cost of unix servers with an eye to reduce overheads. They want to switch to linux. Good, right? Well, no. This BS caused by systemd makes linux look unstable. They passed a decision to move to linux as a trial with a full move when/if this is resolved. Problem is that they are weighing Sun support against the Linux community division over systemd. Thanks Redhat for cooking our goose. Assholes.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @06:05AM
Let's all sing the market control song!
Control control control /
It's the Microsoft way /
Control control control /
Let's have it all our own way /
Control control control /
Redhat will show the way /
Control control control /
They'll have us their own way
Fuck you, Poettering. My sound still isn't working right, I even left my system on overnight to test it and it muted the next morning.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @07:03AM
Sun support should be eclipsed by now, you mean oracle? If you have to choose between oracle and systemd I suggest exploring slackware, small but transparent distros like void... or rolling your own since you'll have to waste amounts of time and money in either way.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 27 2015, @03:17PM
One may wonder if this whole shit storm started when Oracle forked RHEL to produce their own distro.
Soon after RH stopped publishing easy to use patch sets etc.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @12:57PM
I don't see the problem here. You can still choose from FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, PC-BSD and DragonFly BSD. Hell, just go with FreeBSD and you'll get the best of the other variants. They run pretty much all of the same good software that Linux does, without the stupidity of systemd and the other shit from Red Hat and Lennart.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Subsentient on Saturday April 25 2015, @06:10AM
OpenSUSE already did fall.
From https://en.opensuse.org/SDB:Systemd [opensuse.org] :
Systemd is the default and only init system since openSUSE 12.3
Of course, you could always use my init system [universe2.us]. Generally not hard to shoehorn it into a system.
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." -Jiddu Krishnamurti
(Score: 5, Informative) by Marand on Saturday April 25 2015, @07:13AM
Debian, even Jessie (going stable tomorrow) still has other init options than systemd, so you aren't forced into using it if you don't want. If you aren't using it as a desktop system, purging systemd and going back to another init (either the traditional one or some alternative) should have few (if any) drawbacks.
If you're using it as a desktop system, it's a bit more complicated. There are some parts of a typical desktop system (udisks, policykit, network manager*, and many of the session managers like lightdm) that have an indirect dependency to systemd via libpam-systemd, but that doesn't mean you have to change your init.
Systemd isn't just an init, it's more like a userland suite akin to how the BSDs distribute the "core" of the system differently than other packages. You can install systemd -- in Debian, at least -- to make those desktop bits happy while still choosing to use a different init and logger. Having the systemd package installed doesn't make it your init: installing systemd-sysv does that. The trick is to install systemd-shim, which will allow you to remove systemd-sysv and install an init of choice (like sysvinit)
It's also possible, depending on your software choices, to end up with a desktop system that doesn't need systemd at all. You can use wicd instead of network manager[1] for example, and avoid things that needs udisks/polkit/etc. You'll want to turn off auto-installing "recommended" packages if you go this route, but anybody that's avoiding KDE and GNOME and the like probably do this already...
One caveat to all of this: if you're installing, rather than upgrading, you either have to install systemd and then switch after the initial setup, or you have to jump through some hoops to make the installer not install systemd. I saw mention of it on one of the Debian RSS feeds, so it should turn up in a web search. If you're updating from Wheezy (about to become oldstable) it's simpler, because you can pin systemd-sysv to -1 priority and the dependency resolver will fall back to systemd-shim instead.
I don't know what the future will bring, but for now at least, Debian still offers a choice. If you're already using it, don't jump just yet. If you're using Ubuntu, it hasn't had sysvinit in years, so you'll either need to make the move to the parent distro (a good choice anyway) or just deal with the change -- it's not like Ubuntu users had sysvinit anyway.
I've been using Jessie through its entire testing cycle, and my experience so far is that most of the systemd suite is just helper bullshit along the same lines as dbus, hal, and udev. (udev has been folded into the systemd suite, in fact.) The biggest difference is that, so far, it's been less troublesome than the early days[2] of those three. The part I find objectionable is the init and logger, because I don't think they're mature enough yet to be trusted as replacements -- especially considering the quality of other work by the project leaders. Luckily, those parts can be left out in Debian if a user (like myself) feels strongly enough about it to make the effort.
---
[1] Network Manager sucks any way, so just install wicd instead, even if you don't mind systemd.
[2] I recall the early days of some of those, especially hal and dbus, being nightmarish. Constant random breakage until things got sorted.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @12:59PM
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!
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @06:42PM
Many people would challenge that statement.
It's 2014 and You Can Still Pwn a Windows Box Using a Word File or Font [soylentnews.org]
It's Nearly 2015 and Your Windows PC Can Still be Pwned by a Visual Basic Script [soylentnews.org]
It's 2015 and Your Windows Server Can Still be Pwned by a JPEG [soylentnews.org]
-- gewg_
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @08:36PM
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
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
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
Wrong.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Bot on Saturday April 25 2015, @07:17AM
My antenna was raised about systemd precisely because canonical did not keep pushing his own solution over it. Canonical had always tried to be different than the other distros, even when it meant inconveniencing the user. So when they bent over systemd I thought: what does this thing do that is so important?
Account abandoned.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Marand on Saturday April 25 2015, @07:57AM
As I understand it, Canonical wanted a sysvinit replacement and created upstart for that purpose years ago (2006 according to wikipedia). Systemd came later (2010) with the same goal, but developed by RedHat employees because redhat loves its NIH.
Canonical only decided to abandon upstart because Debian chose to support systemd over upstart. Prior to this, upstart and systemd were both equally supported in Debian as alternate inits. I'd guess that Canonical decided that systemd now has enough of the things they wanted from upstart that it's more economical to go with Debian's decision than it is to continue dumping development effort into something that does mostly the same things.
It's another variation of the same old RedHat/GNOME tune: someone else makes it first, so they (RH/GNOME) have to make their own version, go out of their way to avoid compatibility or collaboration, and then everyone gives up and adopts it because RH/GNOME won't give up any ground, so it's easier for everybody else to roll over and let them win.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Jeremiah Cornelius on Saturday April 25 2015, @03:33PM
Bob Young left RedHat - and it became the corporate route to infect and compromise Linux by those who do their magic so well with Microsoft., etc.
You're betting on the pantomime horse...
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @04:13PM
Canonical has gotten heavily involved in "cloud". One of their recent releases was a mini-distro built around containerization (Snappy).
Systemd has of late gained a whole lot of features to supplant Docker.
One may speculate that Canonical saw the writing on the wall, and wanted Debian to go Systemd so they didn't have to do the heavy lifting.
(Score: 2) by Magic Oddball on Saturday April 25 2015, @09:40AM
As of last time I looked, the only major holdouts were Slackware and PCLinuxOS (which I migrated to in late December).
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @01:11PM
Slackware isn't an option. It's a fossil. It isn't 1995 any longer. The economy has been in the shitter for years, and we're busy enough just keeping afloat. We don't have time to spent days configuring a new Linux installation by hand. We need Linux distros that install quickly, that configure themselves, and that work with minimal tweaking. Slackware totally doesn't work like that.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @02:50PM
Sharks are fossils too, yet they rule the seas just as much today as they did hundreds of millions of years ago. Old is different from bad.
The tool to select depends on the task at hand.
(Score: 3, Informative) by present_arms on Saturday April 25 2015, @03:23PM
http://trinity.mypclinuxos.com/ [mypclinuxos.com]
No Systemd here, or in any of the parent distros
DISCLAIMER, I;m the one who did the trinity respin
http://trinity.mypclinuxos.com/
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @03:50PM
Very cool!
Thanks!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @04:19PM
Anything RPM based has already gone down the tube as most of them seem to take their lead from Fedora.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @06:17AM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unity_%28user_interface%29#Privacy_controversy [wikipedia.org]
https://fixubuntu.com/ [fixubuntu.com]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by mmcmonster on Saturday April 25 2015, @10:07AM
Ubuntu is a desktop OS. SystemD is tuned well for desktop OSs. So Why shouldn't Ubuntu use it?
There are wrinkles (error logging seems to be one of them?), but every big project has them, and they have to get into production systems to iron them out. Like PulseAudio before it. It was a mess when it was introduced, but things just work now.
We'll have to learn a few new commands to start and stop services and search the logs, but that's part of using any new OS.
Count me as someone who doesn't care too much whether SystemD becomes part of the core packages of desktop Linux.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @01:01PM
Based on my experience with it, systemd has been expertly tuned to prevent systems from booting properly. In all of my decades of using Linux, I've never had systems rendered un-bootable as many times as I've had happen when using systemd. It's not an init system. It's an init-prevention system.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @04:21PM
Systemd seems to have been developed like Apple developed harder under Jobs. It is tuned for the use of one person, in the Systemd case its Poettering.
(Score: 2) by digitalaudiorock on Saturday April 25 2015, @01:25PM
That's all well and good but frankly you might as well be running Windows at that point. Those of us who've been using Linux for a long time for the things that made it great, and to avoid monolithic bloated black box operating systems very much do care. I've been a Gentoo user for 11 years so at least I can still avoid it as long as I avoid software that's been polluted by it...and my desktop is "tuned" just fine thank you.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @01:41PM
As a long time Linux sysadmin and user, I never thought I'd say this, but Windows is getting much better than Linux. Even with their shitty tablet UIs, Windows 8 and Windows Server 2012 have been more reliable and usable, in my experience, than recent Linux distros.
(Score: 3, Touché) by tibman on Saturday April 25 2015, @06:33PM
Windows still can't delete a file if someone has it open somewhere. I prefer my admin powers to actually be worth something : )
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 26 2015, @02:16AM
Windows does the right thing. Files shouldn't be pulled out from under running applications without warning.
(Score: 3, Informative) by tibman on Sunday April 26 2015, @07:11AM
A less privileged executable has no say on what i do to its files (or itself). One time, while ssh'd into a box, i created a directory with some basic stuff and chroot'd into it and then deleted the entire host OS (redhat). Ssh continued to function and kept my connection alive even though its own executable didn't exist anymore. From my small chroot environment i installed a completely different distro (Gentoo) where the old root was. Built and installed a new kernel. Crossed fingers and rebooted the machine (it worked!). That's the kind of admin powers you get with a real OS. Your reasoning is exactly why you cannot delete windows malware without restarting into safe mode.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 26 2015, @05:34PM
And they are not.
What happens is that their entry in the FS is removed, but as long as the program keeps the file open they have a entry to it.
Flash tries to use this to hide their streaming caches on Linux.
Fire up any video steam, then head for /proc/"flash pid"/fd, if you do a ls -l you will see symlink that points to a file in /tmp that has already been deleted. But as the flash process still has it as open, it can still read and write to it all it wants. but once it lets go, it is gone, unless you go at the FS with a recovery utility.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @07:11PM
Come back and say that AFTER Redmond has a permissions meme that isn't a complete joke.
...and after you don't have to reboot a box running their OS after making minor tweaks.
...and after you don't need layers and layers of band-aids pasted all over their OS.
I have another comment up the thread that mentions several things Redmond does in Ring 0 that are just moronic.
A company run by lawyers and salesmen is NOT the supplier of tech that I want, thank you very much.
-- gewg_
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 26 2015, @02:19AM
What the fuck are you talking about?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Justin Case on Saturday April 25 2015, @11:10AM
This is the first time in a long time that I have no plans to try this Ubuntu release. I expect I'll never install it, nor any future version.
I tolerated the candy-coated Unity GUI because I only had to see it long enough to open a shell and apt-get something usable.
My suspicious went way up when the Amazon spyware appeared, but I could avoid it too.
Now systemd. More than what was already there. Despite the widespread skepticism above and beyond anything in recent memory.
The year of the Linux desktop is the year Linux becomes as stupid as Windows. And I want no part of it thank you very much! From now on I will be installing an OS that doesn't treat me like a TV-watcher with an IQ of 80.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @01:04PM
Linux is worse than Windows now. As shitty as it is to use, my Windows 8 system boots each and every time, even after performing updates. My Fedora system, running systemd, has failed to boot properly many times, especially after updates. It has gotten so bad that I tend to use my Windows 8 laptop instead of my Fedora workstation these days. When Windows 10 is released, I'm probably going to buy that and install it on my workstation. It can't give me a worse experience than Linux has been giving me.
(Score: 2) by tibman on Saturday April 25 2015, @06:37PM
Unfortunately, AC testimonials for controversial subjects are typically ignored. If you want a super-smooth and fast computer that will never fail to boot, try a chromebook. Windows is great if you never do anything custom or advanced. Linux is great if you don't mind occasionally being a data-sleuth to fix (and report!) an issue.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 26 2015, @02:09AM
A Chromebook? Really? A computer that boots but can't actually do anything once booted is just as useless as a computer that doesn't boot at all.
(Score: 2) by tibman on Sunday April 26 2015, @07:19AM
Can't do anything other than everything on the internet. It also has a guest account that makes sense. You could hand the laptop to anyone and they could install anything they wanted and have 35 toolbars in their browser. You just log them out and its all gone. Would you ever let strangers have access to your windows laptop? Would you care if they were adding plugins to the browser or installing random applications?
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @08:36PM
Maybe that is a Fedora problem and not a systemd problem
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @11:18PM
Fedora pretty much is SystemdOS.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 26 2015, @02:26AM
Let me get this straight. It's systemd that's failing to work properly, yet somehow it's a problem with the distro? Well, I know you're full of shit, because people are reporting problems with systemd not booting properly on pretty much every distro that uses it. This has been a particularly bad problem for Debian users since Debian switched to systemd.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 26 2015, @05:18PM
[citation needed] care to link to bug submissions asserting your claim ?
(Score: 4, Interesting) by hash14 on Saturday April 25 2015, @03:23PM
This is the first time in a long time that I have no plans to try this Ubuntu release. I expect I'll never install it, nor any future version.
I tolerated the candy-coated Unity GUI because I only had to see it long enough to open a shell and apt-get something usable.
Same here. I jumped off the Ubuntu train years ago - I retired a dual-boot Ubuntu/Debian machine back in 2012 and have been on Mint and now migrating everything to Gentoo. And prior to retiring that machine, I didn't even use Ubuntu as a full-time OS since 2008 (I started using Linux in 2007 mind you) - after that, it was primarily Debian.
What's wrong with Ubuntu? Why is it so unsuccessful compared to Mint? Well, it's just too intrusive in the name of being user-friendly. Somehow, Mint manages to be _more_ user-friendly _and_ more tech savvy too. We could all discuss why, but I think it primarily has to do with Ubuntu simply trying to do too much. As soon as I heard about Unity, I knew to give up hope on that distro. It oversimplifies to the point where you can't do anything useful in an efficient manner - compare to XFCE or descendants of Gnome2 which are both simple to use _and_ productive environments.
There are other examples of ways that Ubuntu both harms user-friendliness and disregards productivity simultaneously, but Unity is the best such example.
Now systemd. More than what was already there. Despite the widespread skepticism above and beyond anything in recent memory.
Another example of Ubuntu focusing on the wrong priorities.
If Ubuntu had actually promoted init freedom, then they could have courted a lot of talented, technical users and developers, rather than watching them all run off to Gentoo and Devuan. But again, Canonical has shown that this mindshare isn't important to them, hence why they can't develop an effective business model or community.
The year of the Linux desktop is the year Linux becomes as stupid as Windows. And I want no part of it thank you very much! From now on I will be installing an OS that doesn't treat me like a TV-watcher with an IQ of 80.
My hope a Sabayon-like distro will emerge from Gentoo which provides a Debian-like package management system (but Sabayon uses systemd). Hell, it could even use .deb/apt but just build the packages from Gentoo repositories - that would seem like the easiest way in my opinion. Gentoo works for now, but still requires me to manage more than I'm interested in, so I would love to see this. As for Devuan, I'm sceptical that they will be able to provide the necessary maintenance to keep the distro alive, but I certainly hope so. The world still needs a user-friendly distro that promotes true freedom now that Debian's gone.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @04:35PM
That's because Mint don't seem to have bought into the notion of users being idiots, and thus offer a DE that so not assume so either.
Having the "fortune" of interacting with a Gnome dev reveals how much disdain they have for users. This apparently because testing on Gnome 2 revealed that users often did things in unexpected ways.
This seems to be an attitude as old as humanity, as one can see in how Romans considered everyone but them barbarians. Or how European explorers trashed whole societies because they didn't do things the European way.
Mint seems to focus on giving a good media experience out of the box, and beyond that leave the user alone.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by darkfeline on Saturday April 25 2015, @06:32PM
My first thought was, "Go away, flock to BSD, we don't need you." I've noticed a large increase in the useless Linux user population recently, that is, users who whine and contribute nothing back to the Linux ecosystem, not even useful bug reports or suggestions ("I don't like X" is not a useful suggestion). Hopefully, systemd succeeds in driving them out; the ones who stay are those who are either okay with systemd or dislike it and are willing to do something about it because they understand that, for example, the Debian devs have no obligation to cater to their every whim.
So anti-systemd folks, if you are writing your own inits and services managers, great! Progress for one is progress for all. If not, stop posting, you're clogging up the Intertubes.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 25 2015, @09:50PM
Sysadmins like myself never needed to write our own "inits and services managers". We made any desired changes to the init scripts right after the base OS install, then never had to mess with (or suffer a failed boot from) them again.
We have no need of "service managers", since the proper fix for a crashed process is to fix the problem that caused it to crash, rather than just stupidly re-starting it with the same crippling problem it had before.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Sunday April 26 2015, @05:56AM
SystemD will drive away people that contributes too. Which can be suspected to be a reason behind this Psyops called systemd because RedHat is deeply involved in the famous industrial complex.