SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The European Union's interoperability page reports
The primary school in Saint Léger en Yvelines (France) has nearly completely switched to using free software reports the village's deputy mayor Olivier Guillard. "Do not underestimate the task", he advises others on the forum of Etalab, France's open government portal, "and, most of all, persist".
Saint Léger en Yvelines is a commune some 50 km west of Paris. The village has one school, with 6 classes, and includes pre-school. The Jean Moulin school is attended by all of the around 30 children in the commune up to the age of 11. On [April 15], deputy mayor Guillard published his recommendations for others that want to "free their schools from the commercial agenda of proprietary software vendors". Free software is unhindered by the constraint of financial profitability, he argues: there is no planned obsolescence and no lock-in to specific hardware.
Olivier Guillard urges rigorous testing of solutions before suggesting them to teachers. Just as important is to convince the teachers of the benefits of free software. He also recommends being proactive on maintenance and monitoring.
He cautions patience. The school's transition to free software took years, he writes. "Seven years of convincing. Seven years to find free software alternatives for each new commercial offering. Seven years of creating a dialogue and building communication channels with teachers dedicated to digitisation of education."
The school has not rid itself of proprietary software completely. Whiteboard solutions and office documents exchanged in France's education sector forces teachers to use proprietary software, for which the school keeps apart two PCs with proprietary office tools, the deputy mayor writes.
Blogger, Linux advocate, and retired 1-man school IT staff Robert Pogson has a short (two paragraph) post. [It offers several open-source software alternatives as well as hardware recommendations — fair use precludes including the whole post here. -Ed.]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 25 2016, @10:10PM
"he argues: there is no planned obsolescence and no lock-in to specific hardware."
Systemd, "newer cpu", ....
free software was about freedom. Cutting e-waste with not having to upgrade every 2-3 years. Now, it supports about 6-8 years backward hardware compatibility. OS are tossed 12months or 4 years (LTS). Yup no planned obsolesce, just forced.
(Score: 3, Informative) by hendrikboom on Monday April 25 2016, @11:31PM
I'm still running on decade-old hardware. Went through a few distros in the early days, then settled on debian, now in transition to devuan. My old code still runs.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 26 2016, @08:10AM
Just what I was going to post. Right down to the details!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 26 2016, @11:43AM
Yes, I have old hardware too.
486sx25 w/ 12MB of memory. Use to run NT3 and Slackware. Now only can get 8 to 10 year firewall software only.
K6-2 400 w/ 768MB of memory. Use to run Win98, ME, XP, Ubuntu 7 and 8. Now only can get 3 year firewall software. BUT If i install Ubuntu 7, I can update to Ubuntu 9, but have to go through all in-between versions. Can't load 8 or 9 directly.
C6 200 w/ 128MB of memory. I got Gentoo running on it, but cannot compile on the machine since the GCC compiler required 128MB of memory for itself.
PS: I came for the 8bit hybrid world and systems that ran in less than 1MB supporting 75 users with sub-second response time.
(Score: 2) by bitstream on Tuesday April 26 2016, @01:48AM
Let's just put it this way. Some operating systems never had system'd and don't have any plans to ever touch it. And it can run on 80486 or better. The only thing that forces upgrades are that newer versions have more functionality and thus uses more memory.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 27 2016, @02:31AM
Yes, AmigaOS Forever!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 26 2016, @02:27AM
...or perhaps you are aware and are simply a troll.
There's a distro that doesn't suit your needs?
Don't use it.
There are hundreds more available.
Here's the "Top 100". [distrowatch.com]
Don't like systemd?
Don't use it.
There are plenty of distros that don't like it either. [without-systemd.org]
Still can't find what you want?
Build your own version, customized to your own peculiar tastes.
Linux From Scratch [google.com]
Your scorn for "choice" shows you to be a fool.
...and I'll bet the hardware on which I am contentedly running Linux is older than that used by hendrikboom.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 26 2016, @05:07AM
Yeah, right. Many software packages now have systemd as a depend. Seriously, wtf? An init system is a requirement for software?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 26 2016, @06:07AM
Name 3 such packages.
Substantiating links are welcome.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 26 2016, @01:37PM
Not the above AC here.
Open synaptic, right-click on any systemd component (libsystemd-login, libsystemd-daemon, libsystemd-journal, ...) then "Properties". Finally, open the "dependencies" tabs and select "Package that depends on this package" (or whatever it's named in English) in the drop-down list.
There you are: pulseaudio, gdm, network-manager, dbus, gnome-whatever (plus each systemd package depending on the others, but that's expected behavior). And that's on Ubuntu 14.04 which is still supposed to use upstart last I heard.
I don't give a damn fuck about systemd as long as my system is running, but the way it keeps spreading surreptitiously in the OS in places where I wouldn't axpect an init system to be is slowly beginning to give me the creeps.
That or let's just be honest, systemd is not an init system anymore, it's a whole extra layer between the DE and the kernel and whatever already existed as extra layers between the two.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 26 2016, @08:03PM
gnome-whatever
...except that GNOME still runs under *BSD [google.com] and systemd doesn't, so that's a choice of the *package builder*--clearly not a requirement.
Non-systemd Linux distros also have GNOME running.
A solution is to find a different source for your Linux builds.
There's a bunch of those. [without-systemd.org]
N.B. Around these parts, I have mentioned antiX (pronounced "Antiques") a bunch of times for various reasons.
the way it keeps spreading surreptitiously in the OS in places where I wouldn't [expect] an init system to be
In *some* distros of the GNU/Linux OS.
Definitely **not** all.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 26 2016, @09:26PM
Expect the links between Gnome and Systemd to get more entrenched.
That Gnome runs on non-systemd installs are because of Gnome dev efforts.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 27 2016, @06:18AM
Yeah, whatever. May I remind you that you asked to name three such packages and I gave you >5? 4 when excluding gnome. I should have added policykit to the lot for good measure.
In *some* distros of the GNU/Linux OS.
In *the most widely used* distros ... FTFY
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 28 2016, @09:14AM
Open synaptic, right-click on any systemd component
Debian and debian based distros have always had arbitrary dependencies. It is one of the things that eventually drove me from debian.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 27 2016, @07:56AM
p cinnamon Depends gnome-settings-daemon (>= 2.91.5.1)
p gnome-settings-daemon Depends libpam-systemd
p libpam-systemd Depends systemd (= 215-17+deb8u3)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 26 2016, @10:23AM
I think only GNOME really depends on systemd... but I ditched that eons ago already.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 26 2016, @08:06PM
*BSD and systemd are incompatible.
If what you say was true, GNOME wouldn't run under e.g. FreeBSD these days.
...but it still does. [google.com]
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 26 2016, @08:05PM
You know what? I just compiled Enlightenment E19 last summer without any systemd, and systemd is an explicit dependency of Enlightenment. I haven't had the time to try E20, but I have a feeling it will be similar. There are quality ebuilds out there for Gentoo users who have a section in their package mask file that is simply labeled "Poettering" (no systemd, pulseaudio, or networkmanager tyvm).
Maybe I won't ever experience Unity or Gnome 3 without systemd. I'm not certain what I'm missing out on there. I've been a happy XFCE user for quite a while now, with some dabbling on the side. lxdm gets me logged in without needing systemd.
For servers, steering clear of systemd is a breeze. My NAT/UPnP/IPv6 router/DNS cache/DHCP/radvd/wireless AP box is systemd-free just fine. It's also X windows free because there's no goddamn reason for X windows to be on there. Same with my server in the clouds (Apache/PostgreSQL/Dovecot/InspIRCd/XMPP/tons of crap).
Jfyi, I'm waiting for the ebuilds to stabilize for the new nVidia driver that was released for Wayland/Mir. I'm sure there's a repository/overlay out there that has it, I'm just too lazy to find it. Also too lazy to compile from source myself like I used to when I was younger. But I'm excited about finally at least being able to try to move to Wayland and unmerging the shit out of X windows if successful.
Just because something is new doesn't mean it's shit. Please at least whine about your mysterious lack of network transparency in Wayland before the time to spread FUD about that is over. I actually have no idea if systemd is shit or not these days. I don't care about systemd for being systemd. I just don't think Lennart Poettering and friends can code worth jack shit, and I'm perfectly happy with grub/OpenRC/getty/lxdm. It's as simple as that.
Just stop posting this systemd is a lizard people conspiracy-quality shit. At least post something entertaining like the apps guy on the old site.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 27 2016, @08:00AM
It's not so strange. If it's designed to run as a service, then the package will need to supply the scripts for starting/stopping that service. Which depends on what service manager you have, which almost always depends on the init system you have.
Until packages decouple themselves from all service management systems, and simply provide separate scripts for each of the actions, such that a *generic* (by service) script specific to that service management system can manage all services with no modifications, you're stuck with this mess.