Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.raspberry-pi > #38169 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Mike Scott <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-07-08 12:03 +0100 |
| Last post | 2026-07-09 08:41 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 69 — 10 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.raspberry-pi
odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Mike Scott <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> - 2026-07-08 12:03 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-07-08 17:04 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Mike Scott <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> - 2026-07-08 19:57 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-08 17:33 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Mike Scott <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> - 2026-07-08 19:54 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-08 23:17 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-07-09 02:46 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-09 04:34 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2026-07-09 11:14 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2026-07-09 18:31 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-09 22:59 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-10 02:54 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-09 18:29 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-09 22:58 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2026-07-11 12:32 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-11 14:05 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Mike Scott <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> - 2026-07-11 19:37 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-11 22:08 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-12 00:01 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-07-12 03:55 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-12 05:53 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-07-12 16:14 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-12 21:42 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-07-12 22:16 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-12 23:29 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-07-12 23:27 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-13 08:37 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-07-13 16:11 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Tom Blenko <blenko@martingalesystems.com> - 2026-07-13 16:30 -0700
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-07-14 04:09 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-14 23:43 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-07-15 03:10 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-15 12:17 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-15 20:59 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-07-15 23:53 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Mike Scott <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> - 2026-07-16 08:57 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-16 17:52 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-16 18:39 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2026-07-13 23:34 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-14 08:36 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2026-07-16 22:12 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-17 01:16 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2026-07-19 10:15 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-19 10:37 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-19 18:39 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-19 20:31 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-20 00:13 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-20 12:15 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2026-07-20 18:42 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-21 01:13 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-21 08:56 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Ian <${send-direct-email-to-news1021-at-jusme-dot-com-if-you-must}@jusme.com> - 2026-07-21 12:25 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-21 18:03 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-21 23:23 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-21 23:25 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-19 17:55 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-21 23:27 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-17 07:00 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-12 23:25 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-07-12 23:30 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-13 01:16 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-07-13 04:16 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-13 05:50 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-12 23:22 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-13 08:31 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-12 09:07 +0100
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-07-12 16:06 +0000
Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-11 22:07 +0000
resolved, sort of: Re: odd windowing issue (perl Tk) Mike Scott <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> - 2026-07-09 08:41 +0100
Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 Next page →
| From | druck <news@druck.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-16 22:12 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <113bhf2$28hdo$1@druck.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #38247 |
On 14/07/2026 08:36, Richard Kettlewell wrote: > druck <news@druck.org.uk> writes: >> Richard Kettlewell wrote: >>> Wayland was largely created by X11 developers. They know a lot more >>> about it than you. >> >> Richard, that's a strange hill to die on. > > The context was Robert attacking the Wayland developers, from a position > of evident ignorance, via Henry Spencer’s remark “Those who do not > understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly”. But the quote > does not fit, indeed it is almost the opposite of a fit: the reality is > that the Wayland developers do understand X11, more so than most, and > that is why they decided to go in a different direction. I think they may well understand X11 very well, they just don't understand other people value a completely different set of features than they do, and rightly get annoyed that not only do Wayland developers refuse to implement them, but tell them they are wrong for even wanting them. That's the hill, there are the bodies. ---druck
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-17 01:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <113bvpf$2dv15$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #38260 |
On Thu, 16 Jul 2026 22:12:02 +0100, druck wrote: > I think they may well understand X11 very well, they just don't > understand other people value a completely different set of features > than they do, and rightly get annoyed that not only do Wayland > developers refuse to implement them, but tell them they are wrong > for even wanting them. Just because you value a certain set of features, doesn’t mean that anybody else is obligated to implement them for you. If you think those features would be so useful to others, get a group together to implement them yourself. After all, that’s how projects like Wayland and systemd got started in the first place. Oh, and Linux itself, and X11 before that, and ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | druck <news@druck.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-19 10:15 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <113i4ij$7la1$1@druck.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #38263 |
On 17/07/2026 02:16, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > On Thu, 16 Jul 2026 22:12:02 +0100, druck wrote: > >> I think they may well understand X11 very well, they just don't >> understand other people value a completely different set of features >> than they do, and rightly get annoyed that not only do Wayland >> developers refuse to implement them, but tell them they are wrong >> for even wanting them. > > Just because you value a certain set of features, doesn’t mean that > anybody else is obligated to implement them for you. 'Anybody' already had implemented them in X11, that's why we are quite happy with that. > If you think those features would be so useful to others, get a group > together to implement them yourself. Plenty of people already have, but the Wayland developers have refused to accept those features, as they differ from their ideas of what it should and shouldn't do. I would have thought you would understand this by now. > After all, that’s how projects like Wayland and systemd got started in > the first place. Oh, and Linux itself, and X11 before that, and ... Wayland and Systemd were started by RedHat to lock people in to their distro, its development philosophy is diametrically opposed to that of Linux and X11. Your posts give me the impression that you have very little idea about how windowing systems or open source projects work, but very much like to start arguments, so feel free to carry on, on your own. ---druck
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-19 10:37 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <wwvjyqre2vg.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> |
| In reply to | #38268 |
druck <news@druck.org.uk> writes: > On 17/07/2026 02:16, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >> On Thu, 16 Jul 2026 22:12:02 +0100, druck wrote: >>> I think they may well understand X11 very well, they just don't >>> understand other people value a completely different set of features >>> than they do, and rightly get annoyed that not only do Wayland >>> developers refuse to implement them, but tell them they are wrong >>> for even wanting them. >> Just because you value a certain set of features, doesn’t mean that >> anybody else is obligated to implement them for you. > > 'Anybody' already had implemented them in X11, that's why we are quite > happy with that. I note that under XWayland, at least here, xterm -geometry appears to work as expected. So “you can keep using X11” doesn’t reduce to “you can keep using software that’s on an abandonment track”, which would hardly be an appealing proposition. Still, whether that’s true of all XWayland deployments I don’t know. >> If you think those features would be so useful to others, get a group >> together to implement them yourself. > > Plenty of people already have, but the Wayland developers have refused > to accept those features, as they differ from their ideas of what it > should and shouldn't do. I would have thought you would understand > this by now. That’s not really accurate, for example MR264 got merged years ago. More to do with multi-window applications than exact application control over window positioning, but the point is that situation is not “Wayland developer refuse to accept things”. >> After all, that’s how projects like Wayland and systemd got started in >> the first place. Oh, and Linux itself, and X11 before that, and ... > > Wayland and Systemd were started by RedHat to lock people in to their > distro, its development philosophy is diametrically opposed to that of > Linux and X11. Sounds like a conspiracy theory to me. How does this lock-in work in practice? It doesn’t seem to be very effective, I have systemd-based platforms, and a three-layer rendering software chain with Wayland in the middle, and yet no RedHat in sight. As far as I can tell the reality is that everyone was trying to replace sysv init a few years back (something that was desparately overdue), and systemd is the one that got most uptake. Much the same as happened with version control systems (git largely won, against a crowded field) and Unix platforms (Linux won against numerous free and proprietary alternatives). -- https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-19 18:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nc4ju3Fm14mU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #38270 |
On Sun, 19 Jul 2026 10:37:55 +0100, Richard Kettlewell wrote: > As far as I can tell the reality is that everyone was trying to replace > sysv init a few years back (something that was desparately overdue), and > systemd is the one that got most uptake. Much the same as happened with > version control systems (git largely won, against a crowded field) and > Unix platforms (Linux won against numerous free and proprietary > alternatives). MX defaults to sysVinit but offers both. https://mxlinux.org/wiki/system/systemd/ It's a philosophical argument in part and possibly a reaction against Poettering. He is young, relatively, and doesn't show proper respect for System V, POSIX, and other commandments that were chiseled in stone. Personally, I don't miss sysVinit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-19 20:31 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <113j8mq$jalq$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #38273 |
On 19/07/2026 19:39, rbowman wrote: > possibly a reaction against > Poettering. He is young, relatively, and doesn't show proper respect for > System V, POSIX, and other commandments that were chiseled in stone. He is an arrogant little shit who doesn't respect users either. He writes stuff, gets bored and moves on, leaving others to sort out the trail of excrement he has left behind. Pulse audio should have been a warning,. systemd is now here and we must do all the work he was too lazy to do, to make it work... -- "When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." Jonathan Swift.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-20 00:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nc57gjFpm1mU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #38275 |
On Sun, 19 Jul 2026 20:31:38 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > Pulse audio should have been a warning,. systemd is now here and we must > do all the work he was too lazy to do, to make it work... I'm not fond of PulseAudio and friends but systemd works.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-20 12:15 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <113l00f$14e0h$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #38276 |
On 20/07/2026 01:13, rbowman wrote: > On Sun, 19 Jul 2026 20:31:38 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > >> Pulse audio should have been a warning,. systemd is now here and we must >> do all the work he was too lazy to do, to make it work... > > I'm not fond of PulseAudio and friends but systemd works. Except when it does not. Systemd depends on everyone rewriting init scripts to take into account dependencies, which a simple serial loading of daemons by init, rendered unnecessary. Now Poettering and other onanists would argue that's not systemd's problem. BUT it resulted in a huge amount of work to restore the stability of systems that had been stable for years. The same applies to logfiles. When you fundamentally change the way the whole core system of daemons are spawned and monitored, for the sake of shaving a few seconds off boot times, it behoves you to pay attention to those daemons and either rewrite them, or at least rewrite their initialisation and configuration scripts. And that applies to packages, or combinations of packages, that probably haven't been touched in years. -- "When one man dies it's a tragedy. When thousands die it's statistics." Josef Stalin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | druck <news@druck.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-20 18:42 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <113lmmo$1c6tu$1@druck.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #38270 |
On 19/07/2026 10:37, Richard Kettlewell wrote: > druck <news@druck.org.uk> writes: >> Wayland and Systemd were started by RedHat to lock people in to their >> distro, its development philosophy is diametrically opposed to that of >> Linux and X11. > > Sounds like a conspiracy theory to me. How does this lock-in work in > practice? It doesn’t seem to be very effective, I have systemd-based > platforms, and a three-layer rendering software chain with Wayland in > the middle, and yet no RedHat in sight. It didn't work very well because for inexplicable reasons other distros (including otherwise sensible ones, and I'm looking at you Debian) have adopted Red Hat's poison chalice(s). > As far as I can tell the reality is that everyone was trying to replace > sysv init a few years back (something that was desparately overdue), and > systemd is the one that got most uptake. Much the same as happened with > version control systems (git largely won, against a crowded field) and > Unix platforms (Linux won against numerous free and proprietary > alternatives). But the plan was Red Hat customers once on systemd wouldn't want to go through the pain of migrating all their scripts to a multitude of init alternatives they thought all the other distros would adopt for after failing to agree a common solution. ---druck
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-21 01:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nc7ve8F7pt3U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #38279 |
On Mon, 20 Jul 2026 18:42:48 +0100, druck wrote: > It didn't work very well because for inexplicable reasons other distros > (including otherwise sensible ones, and I'm looking at you Debian) have > adopted Red Hat's poison chalice(s). The reasons are rather explicable. Remember Upstart? Debian had a long discussion about whether to switch to Upstart or systemd from sysVinit. Systemd won. Ubuntu wasn't that attached to their own dog food and switche from Upstart to systemd. Fedora also switched from Upstart to systemd. Upstart has been on life support for about 8 years. Runit is another attempt to replace sysV. It's the default on antiX and Void and can be used with a couple of others. MX didn't follow antiX and defaults to sysV with systemd as an option. Distribution maintainers were looking for an alternative to sysV that allowed more flexibility. At least two replacements other than systemd were available. systemd won. Live with it or specify sysV on a distrowatch search. There are 54. Most are based on MX, antiX, Devuan, or Slackware. For a Pi Devuan is one option. https://9to5linux.com/first-look-at-devuan-gnulinux-6-excalibur-on- raspberry-pi-5
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-21 08:56 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <wwvecgwkc7t.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> |
| In reply to | #38281 |
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> writes: > druck wrote: >> It didn't work very well because for inexplicable reasons other distros >> (including otherwise sensible ones, and I'm looking at you Debian) have >> adopted Red Hat's poison chalice(s). > > The reasons are rather explicable. Remember Upstart? Debian had a long > discussion about whether to switch to Upstart or systemd from > sysVinit. Systemd won. Ubuntu wasn't that attached to their own dog > food and switche d from Upstart to systemd. Fedora also switched from > Upstart to systemd. Upstart has been on life support for about 8 > years. Debian’s decision was deeply contested within the project, but the reasoning is well documented. I suspect Upstart is abandonware now. > Runit is another attempt to replace sysV. It's the default on antiX and > Void and can be used with a couple of others. MX didn't follow antiX and > defaults to sysV with systemd as an option. > > Distribution maintainers were looking for an alternative to sysV that > allowed more flexibility. At least two replacements other than systemd > were available. systemd won. IIRC there were upwards of a dozen attempts to replace sysvinit, although only handful that ever reached meaningful levels of adoption (Upstart, systemd, OpenRC; plus launchd if we look beyond Linux). -- https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ian <${send-direct-email-to-news1021-at-jusme-dot-com-if-you-must}@jusme.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-21 12:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn115upad.3j0.${send-direct-email-to-news1021-at-jusme-dot-com-i@vm46.home.jusme.com> |
| In reply to | #38282 |
On 2026-07-21, Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote: > rbowman <bowman@montana.com> writes: >> druck wrote: >>> It didn't work very well because for inexplicable reasons other distros >>> (including otherwise sensible ones, and I'm looking at you Debian) have >>> adopted Red Hat's poison chalice(s). >> >> The reasons are rather explicable. Remember Upstart? Debian had a long >> discussion about whether to switch to Upstart or systemd from >> sysVinit. Systemd won. Ubuntu wasn't that attached to their own dog >> food and switche d from Upstart to systemd. Fedora also switched from >> Upstart to systemd. Upstart has been on life support for about 8 >> years. > > Debian’s decision was deeply contested within the project, but the > reasoning is well documented. > > I suspect Upstart is abandonware now. > >> Runit is another attempt to replace sysV. It's the default on antiX and >> Void and can be used with a couple of others. MX didn't follow antiX and >> defaults to sysV with systemd as an option. >> >> Distribution maintainers were looking for an alternative to sysV that >> allowed more flexibility. At least two replacements other than systemd >> were available. systemd won. > > IIRC there were upwards of a dozen attempts to replace sysvinit, > although only handful that ever reached meaningful levels of adoption > (Upstart, systemd, OpenRC; plus launchd if we look beyond Linux). And IMO, systemd is a pretty decent init system, doing all the things the hodge-podge collection of sysvinit scripts did in a somewhat consistent way. My issue with systemd is its viral tendancy to want to take over everything: systemd-hostnamed systemd-journald systemd-logind systemd-networkd systemd-resolved systemd-timedated systemd-udevd ... -- Ian "Tamahome!!!" - "Miaka!!!"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-21 18:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nc9qj0F7pt3U9@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #38283 |
On Tue, 21 Jul 2026 12:25:49 -0000 (UTC), Ian wrote: > My issue with systemd is its viral tendancy to want to take over > everything: > > systemd-hostnamed systemd-journald systemd-logind systemd-networkd > systemd-resolved systemd-timedated systemd-udevd ... otoh 'systemd-analyze blame' can come in handy and I find systemctl easier than messing around in /etc/init.d.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-21 23:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <113ov20$2dk9m$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #38283 |
On Tue, 21 Jul 2026 12:25:49 -0000 (UTC), Ian wrote: > My issue with systemd is its viral tendancy to want to take over everything: > > systemd-hostnamed > systemd-journald > systemd-logind > systemd-networkd > systemd-resolved > systemd-timedated > systemd-udevd > ... Quite a lot of functionality there that you won’t find elsewhere. systemd-vpick systemd-nspawn systemd-confext systemd-sysext systemd-firstboot systemd-factory-reset systemd-mount systemd-mstack systemd-measure systemd-stdio-bridge systemd-storage-block
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-21 23:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <113ov54$2dk9m$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #38279 |
On Mon, 20 Jul 2026 18:42:48 +0100, druck wrote: >> Sounds like a conspiracy theory to me. How does this lock-in work >> in practice? It doesn’t seem to be very effective, I have >> systemd-based platforms, and a three-layer rendering software chain >> with Wayland in the middle, and yet no RedHat in sight. > > It didn't work very well because for inexplicable reasons other > distros (including otherwise sensible ones, and I'm looking at you > Debian) have adopted Red Hat's poison chalice(s). Bizarre. I have heard others claim, with an equally straight face, that Red Hat’s diabolical plot *was* to force the other distros to adopt that “poison chalice” ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-19 17:55 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nc4hbhFm14mU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #38268 |
On Sun, 19 Jul 2026 10:15:00 +0100, druck wrote: > Wayland and Systemd were started by RedHat to lock people in to their > distro, its development philosophy is diametrically opposed to that of > Linux and X11. Red Hat failed rather spectacularly if that was the motivation. I'm running the Trixie derived Raspberry Pi OS on a Pi 5 with systemd/wayland. Both the Fedora and SUSE Leap 16 machines are KDE with systemd/wayland. The Ubuntu 26.04 mini is systemd/wayland. The Mint laptop is systemd/X11. In as much as they can be called 'competitors' SUSE, Debian, and Ubuntu adopted them. I ran EndeavourOS/KDE for a while with systemd/wayland. It's Arch based and I think Arch was an early systemd adopter. I have MX/Xfce in a VM and antiX on an old eeePC. Both are SysVinit/X11. I believe the MX/KDE version is wayland. Since I don't work with Motif anymore I don't have a dog in the fight but you have to go out of your way to find distros that haven't went to both. Even Mint is trying to get Cinnamon running on wayland. I've selected the 'experimental' Cinnamon/wayland session and the last time I did it had problems.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-21 23:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <113ov9k$2dk9m$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #38268 |
On Sun, 19 Jul 2026 10:15:00 +0100, druck wrote: > On 17/07/2026 02:16, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >> >> Just because you value a certain set of features, doesn’t mean that >> anybody else is obligated to implement them for you. > > 'Anybody' already had implemented them in X11, that's why we are > quite happy with that. > >> If you think those features would be so useful to others, get a >> group together to implement them yourself. > > Plenty of people already have, but the Wayland developers have > refused to accept those features ... But you said those features are already present in X11. So why not just stick with X11, and continue sponsoring development of that, to help keep it going? Why complain that others are abandoning X11 and choosing Wayland instead?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-17 07:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <113cger$2i6gu$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #38260 |
On 16/07/2026 22:12, druck wrote: > On 14/07/2026 08:36, Richard Kettlewell wrote: >> druck <news@druck.org.uk> writes: >>> Richard Kettlewell wrote: >>>> Wayland was largely created by X11 developers. They know a lot more >>>> about it than you. >>> >>> Richard, that's a strange hill to die on. >> >> The context was Robert attacking the Wayland developers, from a position >> of evident ignorance, via Henry Spencer’s remark “Those who do not >> understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly”. But the quote >> does not fit, indeed it is almost the opposite of a fit: the reality is >> that the Wayland developers do understand X11, more so than most, and >> that is why they decided to go in a different direction. > > I think they may well understand X11 very well, they just don't > understand other people value a completely different set of features > than they do, and rightly get annoyed that not only do Wayland > developers refuse to implement them, but tell them they are wrong for > even wanting them. > > That's the hill, there are the bodies. > Keep asking for what you want and you may just get it. Or implement it yourself > ---druck -- "And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch". Gospel of St. Mathew 15:14
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-12 23:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nbim3nFe81rU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #38230 |
On 12 Jul 2026 22:16:40 GMT, Robert Riches wrote: > All you have to do is use the proper syntax to specify > the remote display server in $DISPLAY or when calling the library > function to open the display, set XHost appropriately, and supply the > XAUTH key/cookie/whatever. We tended to set 'xhost +'. 'Why is it suddenly snowing on my computer?'
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-12 23:30 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn11588tj.4f3.spamtrap42@one.localnet> |
| In reply to | #38233 |
On 2026-07-12, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: > On 12 Jul 2026 22:16:40 GMT, Robert Riches wrote: > >> All you have to do is use the proper syntax to specify >> the remote display server in $DISPLAY or when calling the library >> function to open the display, set XHost appropriately, and supply the >> XAUTH key/cookie/whatever. > > We tended to set 'xhost +'. 'Why is it suddenly snowing on my computer?' That's where the "appropriately" part comes in. If there aren't enough layers of security fencing between what you're doing and either pranksters or bad guys, you want to be more selective. I would agree that in _MOST_ cases, ssh -X is probably preferable in today's environment. -- Robert Riches spamtrap42@jacob21819.net (Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.raspberry-pi
csiph-web