SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Debian Jesse is going to have Gnome3 as the default desktop.
The desktop re-qualification page, used to help choose which desktop will be default, has in the Jesse version a weight for systemd integration, and of course only Gnome3 does it (at least for now). This will surely make the systemd/gnome3 fanbase happy, but possibly will make others unhappy, as it [may] be seen as another step towards mono-culture, until we soon end up with all distros being redhat clones.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Integration with systemd Making Gnome3 the Default Debian Desktop
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 135 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Ships are safe in harbor, but they were never meant to stay there.
(Score: 2) by tonyPick on Wednesday September 24 2014, @04:16PM
Fundamentally? systemd is trying to do Too Damn Much and weld it in via the init system, which could be better, but isn't terribly broken for most all the traditional use cases.
Removing and improving on legacy init is one job (which does need doing). The consolidation and centralisation of a grab bag of system capabilities into a common infrastructure is a different job; systemd is munging them both into one thing. Bad.
So for any core system update you're balancing risk, benefits and costs: As a developer/user (primarily in the mid-range embedded space) I'm seeing no solid benefits, large risks and massive knock on costs on the future of the infrastructure, as systemd becomes an increasingly pervasive dependency for everything from logging to authentication to networking etc...
It's not a "vi versus emacs" that if you don't like it you pick something else and go with that - it's becoming increasingly hard (as per TFA) to avoid the damn thing. This should be because it's *better*, but it isn't - it's because it's *different*. This is not a problem for Gnome and Redhat, and if you're looking at their distribution then this may even be a good thing, but the world is not RHEL, and we aren't all worried about containerised Gnome.
I could go on, but whilst I don't agree with it all this essentially covers a lot of what I would say: http://ewontfix.com/14/ [ewontfix.com]
Now having said all that; I'd _like_ to be wrong, and for it to be a painless improvement, but having looked at it I'm not seeing anything persuasive from the systemd folks and from the sheer level of crud thrown about (e.g. the Kernel debug line debacle, wrong on *so* many levels) to the state of the docs (quantity != quality) to the source code in the repo (journal-qrcode.c? Seriously?) don't fill me with the warm and fuzzies.
(Score: 2) by tonyPick on Wednesday September 24 2014, @06:49PM
And replying to myself here, but you always stumble across the best link after the event....
http://blog.lusis.org/blog/2014/09/23/end-of-linux/ [lusis.org]
(Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday September 24 2014, @11:10PM
With barely a minute's thought, it seems obvious that there's nothing systemd does that couldn't be accomplished by putting it in the place of rcS and letting the old init call it.
Proper design would ask how minimal can the change be and still do the job and how far up in the tree can it go. They're doing the opposite of proper design here.