Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Sun 24 Mar 2019, 00:59
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Announcements
boycott systemd
Moderators: Flash, Ian, JohnMurga
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 26 of 26 [384 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 24, 25, 26
Author Message
chillinfart

Joined: 22 May 2006
Posts: 91

PostPosted: Tue 24 May 2016, 01:25    Post subject:  

I tried Parabola Linux (Arch based) due to a nice optimized Intel driver for my netbook, the ****ing system was hanging every 30 seconds thanks to a bug in a service (logind). Few documentation available about the bug, after finding the quirky service. Once i disabled some text in logind.conf, i can get rid of the setup.

Finally i gave up with Parabola after a minor thing (bad support for my Ralink RT3090 unlike Tahrpup), but thanks to this i found how systemd works since the POV from a final user.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
jamesbond

Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 3284
Location: The Blue Marble

PostPosted: Sun 02 Oct 2016, 00:11    Post subject:  

How to crash systemd in one tweet (seriously!) - reported 3 days ago. The bug has existed for over two years.

If you think "but ... but ... every software has a bug, why is systemd singled out!", then please read the linked article to see why it is indeed so (hint: this isn't the only reason-defying bugs).

_________________
Fatdog64, Slacko and Puppeee user. Puppy user since 2.13.
Contributed Fatdog64 packages thread.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Elena


Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 24

PostPosted: Sun 02 Oct 2016, 14:24    Post subject:  

For a non-Systemd Arch Linux, I can recommend Obarun Linux

It's already my favorite Linux (besides Puppylinux). A new .ISO will be out in just a few days...

EDIT: New ISO got released.

Last edited by Elena on Tue 04 Oct 2016, 09:58; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
rufwoof

Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Posts: 2915

PostPosted: Sun 02 Oct 2016, 17:53    Post subject:  

Elena wrote:
For a non-Systemd Arch Linux, I can recommend Obarun Linux

It's already my favorite Linux (besides Puppylinux). A new .ISO will be out in just a few days...

How quickly do security updates comes through from Obarun? Debian and its SystemD took a day for recent Chromimum and Openssl security fixes to drop into my system. How stable and extensive is Obarun's repository? If I install Openbox, will a version of Blender that works well with that version of Openbox also be installed (python libs etc.)?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Elena


Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 24

PostPosted: Sun 02 Oct 2016, 18:44    Post subject:  

Thanks for your interest, @rufwoof.

Obarun is a rolling release using the Arch Linux repo (stable, but of course you can add testing etc.) The package lists of Arch as well as from the AUR repo are well maintained and update several times a day. Blender and Openbox should be up-to-date (using those myself too). Dependencies will install together with the the main application, as expected.

Yet Obarun also has it's own package list. Mainly with non-Systemd-packages and their different, reorganized init system (Runit or S6). I'm using ObarunS6_x86_64-v0.0.6.

For questions, the main dev's of Obarun on Github, Eric and bit, are ususally on IRC (irc.freenode.org, #obarun) and on their forum. Both are quite helpful and friendly.

You won't get Wine atm (because it's strictly non-systemd). For this need I'm booting Puppy Linux.
With some configuration yourself (browser, different Window Manager, implementing some PuppyLinux apps, etc.), it's a very good distribution.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Colonel Panic


Joined: 16 Sep 2006
Posts: 2074

PostPosted: Sat 12 Nov 2016, 14:53    Post subject:  

I'm experimenting at the moment with running distros which rely on sysinit rather than systemd, and I find that when the computer boots up now it no longer runs a process for 1 minute 30 seconds before it finishes booting, which used to happen before. It's almost like a two year old computer now instead of an eight year old one.
_________________
Acer Aspire M1610 (Core 2 Duo, 2.3 GHz), 3 GB of RAM, 320 GB hard drive running Sparky 4.7 (32-bit), Devuan 2.0.0, Slackel Openbox 7.0, Bunsen Helium 4, AntiX 17.2.1 (32-bit), Stella 6.8, ELive 3.0.3, Puppy Xenial 7.5 CE and Pardus 17.5.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
darkcity


Joined: 23 May 2010
Posts: 2549
Location: near here

PostPosted: Wed 30 Jan 2019, 14:11    Post subject:  

"The Tragedy of systemd" by Benno Rice [2019, 48mins]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_AIw9bGogo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
shevy

Joined: 13 Feb 2019
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Wed 13 Feb 2019, 13:14    Post subject:  

I watched the video but it was a huge disappointment.

The primary problem I have had was with the quality of the talk. The quality was very low. Here I mean the "arguments" given by him.

He brought mostly strawman arguments and whacked away at that rather than present an objective view.

It's even more hilarious since he is mostly a FreeBSD dude - the FreeBSD dudes don't have a problem with systemd since systemd does not work on the BSDs.

My primary problem in general is that there is not really a lot of quality in the whole systemd debate. It already begins with "systemd is a replacement
for init" - it actually is not. It is a lot bigger and does more things, so HOW can we even compare it to init?

> I'm experimenting at the moment with running distros which rely on sysinit rather
> than systemd, and I find that when the computer boots up now it no longer runs a
> process for 1 minute 30 seconds before it finishes booting, which used to happen
> before. It's almost like a two year old computer now instead of an eight year old
> one.

Yes that has been my problem too. Whenever I would compile programs again,
I had to take care that nothing in systemd breaks, since that would render my
computer unusable. And that happened too many times. I never had this problem
with oldschool init.

Say what you want about the reasoning, but simplicity IS easier to handle. I guess
I am not the target audience because Red Hat wants to target Average Joe + business,
rather than veterans or semi-veterans of Linux.

My biggest gripe with systemd in general still is not its low quality or snobbish dev team
but that developers in distributions such as debian attempted to dictate this onto the
downstream user. This was IMO the biggest problem and biggest abuse, not the
fact that Red Hat sponsored and paid the development for this corporate-piece
software.

If Puppy/Fatdog ever were to go the systemd route, I hope it would do it like LFS/BLFS
and come in two flavours. I could not want to stand anyone forcing systemd onto me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
jamesbond

Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 3284
Location: The Blue Marble

PostPosted: Thu 14 Feb 2019, 01:38    Post subject:  

Colonel Panic wrote:
I'm experimenting at the moment with running distros which rely on sysinit rather than systemd, and I find that when the computer boots up now it no longer runs a process for 1 minute 30 seconds before it finishes booting, which used to happen before. It's almost like a two year old computer now instead of an eight year old one.
Which is ironic considering that one of the supposed benefits of systemd was a faster boot.

Quote:
It already begins with "systemd is a replacement
for init" - it actually is not. It is a lot bigger and does more things, so HOW can we even compare it to init?
And that is exactly one of the points. In the beginning systemd was touted as a better init replacement so it looked harmless, but in the end it is obvious what it actually is - a system-management-software that wants to manage everything. It wants to be _THE_ operating system.

Quote:
My biggest gripe with systemd in general still is not its low quality or snobbish dev team
They can afford to be snobbish because it doesn't affect their bottom-line. They don't need to listen to "users" because these "users" don't pay their salaries. RH does. And people who pay RH aren't these "users" who are complaining. So good riddance Twisted Evil

Quote:

but that developers in distributions such as debian attempted to dictate this onto the
downstream user. This was IMO the biggest problem and biggest abuse, not the
fact that Red Hat sponsored and paid the development for this corporate-piece
software.
If you see a little deeper you will see that how the this was done. They (attempt to) make everything depends on systemd. You look at GNOME desktop for example, they deprecate everything and links with systemd libraries instead. But you shouldn't be surprised, since many GNOME people are paid by RH too ... The point is, they try to make it harder and harder to build system without systemd, until the point people just give up and include systemd as a dependency. And once it's in (as a dependency), then why not use is as well?

But all hope is not lost. People are reacting. Just like "apulse" library implements stubs to satisfy dependency links for programs that expects pulseaudio, there are already libraries that stubs out systemd libraries as well. Attempt to force "udev" to be part of systemd failed; we have "eudev" which shows that udev can and should be out of systemd (and some of the functions that were in udev were now done by the kernel itself).

I'm now more concerned about the future of Linux kernel without Linus. With all due respects to Linus stewards and lieutenants; it was obvious that Linus acted as a gate of sanity that prevented many half-baked ideas or agenda-laden stuff from being merged into the kernel (some of these ideas/stuff actually came from his closest lieutenants!). With him gone I wouldn't be surprised if there is a tighter integration between the kernel and systemd (for example).

Quote:
If Puppy/Fatdog ever were to go the systemd route, I hope it would do it like LFS/BLFS
and come in two flavours. I could not want to stand anyone forcing systemd onto me.
If it is still humanely possible for us to do it, Fatdog will never switch to systemd.
_________________
Fatdog64, Slacko and Puppeee user. Puppy user since 2.13.
Contributed Fatdog64 packages thread.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 26 of 26 [384 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 24, 25, 26
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Announcements
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0458s ][ Queries: 13 (0.0088s) ][ GZIP on ]