Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #227019 > unrolled thread

Buster with MATE without systemd

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Buster with MATE without systemd Marc Shapiro <marcnshap@gmail.com> - 2020-09-16 04:50 +0200
    Re: Buster with MATE without systemd songbird <songbird@anthive.com> - 2020-09-16 12:20 +0200
    Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-09-16 14:00 +0200
    Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2020-09-16 14:00 +0200
    Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-09-16 14:40 +0200
      Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Andrew Cater <amacater@gmail.com> - 2020-09-16 15:10 +0200
    Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Nito <nito@dismail.de> - 2020-09-16 15:20 +0200
    Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> - 2020-09-16 19:50 +0200
      Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2020-09-16 20:10 +0200
        Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> - 2020-09-17 01:40 +0200
          Re: Buster with MATE without systemd David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-09-17 03:20 +0200
            Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> - 2020-09-17 04:50 +0200
            Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Marc Shapiro <marcnshap@gmail.com> - 2020-09-17 05:10 +0200
              Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> - 2020-09-17 06:40 +0200
                Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Marc Shapiro <marcnshap@gmail.com> - 2020-09-17 09:00 +0200
                Re: Buster with MATE without systemd "Rick Thomas" <rick.thomas@pobox.com> - 2020-09-17 09:10 +0200
                Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Kenneth Parker <sea7kenp@gmail.com> - 2020-09-17 09:40 +0200
      Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-09-16 21:40 +0200
        Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2020-09-16 22:00 +0200
          Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-09-16 22:10 +0200
        Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> - 2020-09-17 02:50 +0200
      Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-09-18 09:40 +0200
        Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> - 2020-09-19 07:50 +0200
          Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-09-19 13:50 +0200
            Re: Buster with MATE without systemd Liam O'Toole <liam.p.otoole@gmail.com> - 2020-09-20 01:20 +0200

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#227019 — Buster with MATE without systemd

I have a fresh install of Buster which is running MATE as the Desktop 
Environment.  It has taken me until now to get it working, without 
messing up my current Stretch install on the same machine.  The next 
thing that I want to do is replace systemd with sysvinit.  I am not 
trying to start a flamewar about which is better.  I want sysvinit, not 
systemd, let's leave it at that.

I ran 'aptitude install sysvinit-core'.  This resulted in about 2 dozen 
packages to be removed (some of which, I would have removed anyway) and 
a similar number with unmet dependencies (mostly recommends).  I can 
live with that and work around any issues once I'm running on sysvinit, 
so I accept the option.

This gives me another screen full of text that basically says that it 
needs a terminal emulator, but xterm is being removed.  It wants to 
install pterm and, again, leave a number of recommends as they are.  OK, 
I accept that option.

Now I get a full screen of packages to be removed.  Most are libraries, 
and what seem to be MATE virtual packages, along with some other 
packages, including the GIMP.  I DO want MATE and the GIMP.  This looks 
like a problem.  I cancel the install.

So, my question is:  Can I replace systemd with sysvint and still keep 
MATE?  Do I need to let aptitude uninstall MATE, and then reinstall 
after sysvinit has been installed?  Or have MATE and the GIMP been 
updated in a way that requires systemd and not sysvinit?

If it is possible to do what I want, what is the easiest way to 
accomplish it?


Marc

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#227028

Marc Shapiro wrote:
...
> If it is possible to do what I want, what is the easiest way to 
> accomplish it?

  i haven't tried that as i'm ok with what i have going but
i'll be interested in what you find out.

  can you clone your current partition and then try it out
and if it doesn't work then you could restore it?


  songbird

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#227030

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Ma, 15 sep 20, 19:28:34, Marc Shapiro wrote:
> 
> I ran 'aptitude install sysvinit-core'.  This resulted in about 2 dozen
> packages to be removed (some of which, I would have removed anyway) and a
> similar number with unmet dependencies (mostly recommends).  I can live with
> that and work around any issues once I'm running on sysvinit, so I accept
> the option.

Try installing libpam-elogind as well.

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#227031

On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 07:28:34PM -0700, Marc Shapiro wrote:
> I want sysvinit, not systemd

Should be easy.

> I ran 'aptitude install sysvinit-core'.

> This gives me another screen full of text [...]

> Now I get a full screen of packages to be removed. [...]

I think the basic problem here is that you used aptitude instead of
apt-get.  Aptitude is probably not very well tested for this switch-over,
and seems to be trying to out-clever itself.

Just use "apt-get install sysvinit-core" like the bot factoid says.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#227033

	Hi.

On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 07:28:34PM -0700, Marc Shapiro wrote:
> So, my question is:  Can I replace systemd with sysvint and still keep MATE?

Exibit 1 (mate-core and systemd-sysv are installed):

# apt install sysvinit-core systemd-
...
The following packages will be REMOVED:
  caja dbus-user-session gvfs gvfs-backends gvfs-daemons libpam-systemd
...
  systemd systemd-sysv udisks2
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  initscripts insserv startpar sysv-rc sysvinit-core

Exibit 2:

# apt install sysvinit-core systemd- udisks2
...
 udisks2 : Depends: libpam-systemd but it is not going to be installed


Exibit 3:

# apt install sysvinit-core systemd- policykit-1
...
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 policykit-1 : Depends: libpam-systemd but it is not going to be installed


So, to answer your question. It may be possible to keep assorted MATE
programs (text editor, terminal, etc) and have sysvinit-core installed.
But everything that makes MATE the DE (i.e. file manager, panel,
session, etc) is tied to either udisks2 or policykit, and you cannot
keep those (both require libpam-systemd) and have sysvinit-sysv.

Even if you cheat it with equivs, and create a replacement package
for libpam-systemd, both udisks2 or policykit - you'll just break those
and leave yourself with non-mounting storage media and without the
ability to suspend and poweroff.

Reco

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#227034

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Looking at the Wikipedia entry for Devuan -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devuan - it appears that the folks over there
have had to modify precisely udisks2 and policykit. This is not a Devuan
support list - but it looks as if stock Debian may not allow the switch
once a full system is installed. If you were to install only a minimum,
text-only system, switch to sysvinit and then use tasksel to add the MATE
desktop environment, it might then work but there's no guarantee unless you
try this.

All the very best, as ever,

Andy C.

On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 12:30 PM Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> wrote:

>         Hi.
>
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 07:28:34PM -0700, Marc Shapiro wrote:
> > So, my question is:  Can I replace systemd with sysvint and still keep
> MATE?
>
> Exibit 1 (mate-core and systemd-sysv are installed):
>
> # apt install sysvinit-core systemd-
> ...
> The following packages will be REMOVED:
>   caja dbus-user-session gvfs gvfs-backends gvfs-daemons libpam-systemd
> ...
>   systemd systemd-sysv udisks2
> The following NEW packages will be installed:
>   initscripts insserv startpar sysv-rc sysvinit-core
>
> Exibit 2:
>
> # apt install sysvinit-core systemd- udisks2
> ...
>  udisks2 : Depends: libpam-systemd but it is not going to be installed
>
>
> Exibit 3:
>
> # apt install sysvinit-core systemd- policykit-1
> ...
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>  policykit-1 : Depends: libpam-systemd but it is not going to be installed
>
>
> So, to answer your question. It may be possible to keep assorted MATE
> programs (text editor, terminal, etc) and have sysvinit-core installed.
> But everything that makes MATE the DE (i.e. file manager, panel,
> session, etc) is tied to either udisks2 or policykit, and you cannot
> keep those (both require libpam-systemd) and have sysvinit-sysv.
>
> Even if you cheat it with equivs, and create a replacement package
> for libpam-systemd, both udisks2 or policykit - you'll just break those
> and leave yourself with non-mounting storage media and without the
> ability to suspend and poweroff.
>
> Reco
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#227035

On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 19:28:34 -0700, Marc Shapiro wrote:
> I have a fresh install of Buster which is running MATE as the Desktop
> Environment.   […]   The next thing that I
> want to do is replace systemd with sysvinit.
>  
> Now I get a full screen of packages to be removed.  Most are libraries, and
> what seem to be MATE virtual packages, along with some other packages,
> including the GIMP.  I DO want MATE and the GIMP.  This looks like a
> problem.

The problem with MATE is that many MATE packages depend on mate-polkit, which 
depends on policykit-1, which in buster depends on libpam-systemd.
In Bullseye this dependency is changed to the new virtual package  
logind, which can be provided by either systemd or elogind.
There may be other packages pulling in systemd.

Using MATE without any logind backend does mostly work, but you'll miss things 
like auto-mounting drives etc.

Until bullseye becomes stable, you could maybe try to trick apt into accepting 
elogind, by creating your own 'libpam-system', 'libsystemd0' packages that 
just pull in the elogind counterparts.
This may however have unintended side-effects if something genuinely depends 
on systemd specifically.

There's also an old bug about this:
 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=909192


~~ Nito

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#227040

On Tue, 15 Sep 2020 19:28:34 -0700
Marc Shapiro <marcnshap@gmail.com> wrote:

> I have a fresh install of Buster which is running MATE as the Desktop 
> Environment.  It has taken me until now to get it working, without 
> messing up my current Stretch install on the same machine.  The next 
> thing that I want to do is replace systemd with sysvinit.  I am not 
> trying to start a flamewar about which is better.  I want sysvinit, not 
> systemd, let's leave it at that.
> 
> I ran 'aptitude install sysvinit-core'.  This resulted in about 2 dozen 
> [snip]
> 
>
> So, my question is:  Can I replace systemd with sysvint and still keep 
> MATE?  Do I need to let aptitude uninstall MATE, and then reinstall 
> after sysvinit has been installed?  Or have MATE and the GIMP been 
> updated in a way that requires systemd and not sysvinit?

Short answer?  Probably not.  systemd has become too pervasive a
dependency to do so.  It shouldn't be.  No other init system I know of
is.

> If it is possible to do what I want, what is the easiest way to 
> accomplish it?

Last year, I tried to install Buster with sysvinit as I had done
previously with Stretch.  I started with a basic terminal install.
(Ultimately intending to have Openbox window manager and a single
lxpanel for my GUI as I had done with Stretch.) I converted Buster to
sysvinit with no problems. It rebooted and all looked fine until I
tried to install xorg. I noted that sysvinit would be uninstalled and
systemd reinstalled.  I still had all the systemd libraries. They
hadn't been removed. And I wasn't trying to created a systemd-less
system. Even trying a minimal xorg install resulted in the same
problem. The culprit?  dbus, which is an xorg dependency, but it itself
has a systemd dependency.

To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and
numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has
become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully
convert to systvinit.  Even trying to install something that has no
systemd dependency at all depends on something, that depends on
something else, etc. that has a systemd dependency.  And systemd
gets reinstalled.

I think to do what you want to do with Buster will require a complete
recompile from source removing all systemd dependencies.

My solution?  Devuan Beowulf(Buster). All systemd dependencies have
been removed, etc.  Sysvinit runs just fine. It's the default.  You even
have the option to use Openrc as an init, but it's still listed as
"experimental."

Good Luck. 

B

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#227041

On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:32:14AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and
> numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has
> become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully
> convert to systvinit.

If you specify "... on a desktop system", then maybe you're correct.

For most servers, it shouldn't be an issue.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#227049

On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:52:15 -0400
Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:32:14AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and
> > numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has
> > become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully
> > convert to systvinit.  
> 
> If you specify "... on a desktop system", then maybe you're correct.
> 
> For most servers, it shouldn't be an issue.

The subject _was_ about desktops, MATE specifically, not servers.

However, my trials with Buster was from a year ago.  And I haven't
tried a sysvinit install with it since. Perhaps some systemd
dependencies have been eliminated.  Be great if they all were! Init
systems should never ever be dependencies.

B

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#227056

On Wed 16 Sep 2020 at 16:15:12 (-0700), Patrick Bartek wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:52:15 -0400
> Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:32:14AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > > To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and
> > > numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has
> > > become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully
> > > convert to systvinit.  
> > 
> > If you specify "... on a desktop system", then maybe you're correct.
> > 
> > For most servers, it shouldn't be an issue.
> 
> The subject _was_ about desktops, MATE specifically, not servers.
> 
> However, my trials with Buster was from a year ago.  And I haven't
> tried a sysvinit install with it since. Perhaps some systemd
> dependencies have been eliminated.  Be great if they all were! Init
> systems should never ever be dependencies.

I know little to nothing about DEs. However, I see that there are
people who run MATE without running a systemd init system. This (dated)
link makes a distinction between installation dependencies and runtime
dependencies, so I presume that you might be able to put up with the
presence of unused systemd packages in the installation.

https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/279603/using-mate-desktop-without-systemd

Later:

> […] Had no problems converting to
> sysvinit with a terminal only system.  First thing I did.  I always
> start my installs that way and build from there.  Lighter, faster, more
> efficient system without all the crud that comes with a general DE
> install.

I would certainly recommend that the OP did that, rather than
converting as an afterthought.

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#227061

On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 19:55:45 -0500
David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:

> On Wed 16 Sep 2020 at 16:15:12 (-0700), Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:52:15 -0400
> > Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> wrote:  
> > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:32:14AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:  
> > > > To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and
> > > > numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has
> > > > become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully
> > > > convert to systvinit.    
> > > 
> > > If you specify "... on a desktop system", then maybe you're correct.
> > > 
> > > For most servers, it shouldn't be an issue.  
> > 
> > The subject _was_ about desktops, MATE specifically, not servers.
> > 
> > However, my trials with Buster was from a year ago.  And I haven't
> > tried a sysvinit install with it since. Perhaps some systemd
> > dependencies have been eliminated.  Be great if they all were! Init
> > systems should never ever be dependencies.  
> 
> I know little to nothing about DEs. However, I see that there are
> people who run MATE without running a systemd init system. This (dated)
> link makes a distinction between installation dependencies and runtime
> dependencies, so I presume that you might be able to put up with the
> presence of unused systemd packages in the installation.
> 
> https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/279603/using-mate-desktop-without-systemd

This is outdateded -- It's for Jessie.  systemd only had a toe hold
then.  It's more entrenched now with Buster.  Converting Stretch to
sysvinit too only installing sysvinit.  That install took care of the
rest.  Not so with Buster with xorg.  Sysvinit still installs and
works just fine with a terminal system though. 

> Later:
> 
> > […] Had no problems converting to
> > sysvinit with a terminal only system.  First thing I did.  I always
> > start my installs that way and build from there.  Lighter, faster, more
> > efficient system without all the crud that comes with a general DE
> > install.  
> 
> I would certainly recommend that the OP did that, rather than
> converting as an afterthought.

Once you install a DE, getting rid of it (or parts of it) is impossible.
Too many interconnected dependencies.  I know.  I've tried.  That's how
I learned to build a system from a basic terminal install instead.

B

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#227062

On 9/16/20 5:55 PM, David Wright wrote:
> On Wed 16 Sep 2020 at 16:15:12 (-0700), Patrick Bartek wrote:
>> On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:52:15 -0400
>> Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:32:14AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
>>>> To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and
>>>> numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has
>>>> become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully
>>>> convert to systvinit.
>>> If you specify "... on a desktop system", then maybe you're correct.
>>>
>>> For most servers, it shouldn't be an issue.
>> The subject _was_ about desktops, MATE specifically, not servers.
>>
>> However, my trials with Buster was from a year ago.  And I haven't
>> tried a sysvinit install with it since. Perhaps some systemd
>> dependencies have been eliminated.  Be great if they all were! Init
>> systems should never ever be dependencies.
> I know little to nothing about DEs. However, I see that there are
> people who run MATE without running a systemd init system. This (dated)
> link makes a distinction between installation dependencies and runtime
> dependencies, so I presume that you might be able to put up with the
> presence of unused systemd packages in the installation.
>
> https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/279603/using-mate-desktop-without-systemd
>
> Later:
>
>> […] Had no problems converting to
>> sysvinit with a terminal only system.  First thing I did.  I always
>> start my installs that way and build from there.  Lighter, faster, more
>> efficient system without all the crud that comes with a general DE
>> install.
> I would certainly recommend that the OP did that, rather than
> converting as an afterthought.

Unfortunately, as it says at the bottom of that page, systemd-shim is no 
longer available.  It worked in Jessie, I used it then, but is not an 
option, now.

As for installing only a minimal, textbased, system and then converting 
-- I'm sure that works, until you try to install xorg and Mate.  That is 
where things start to get 'fun.'  Dependencies are dependencies.  
Running without a DE, or even a different DE is not an option in this 
case.  I am not the only one using this box.  My wife is now working 
from home and my daughter's college is strictly distance learning.  
(Thank you Caronavirus Pandemic.) I can not go changing how things work 
for them at this time.

I did try to use apt-get, instead of aptitude, as was suggested by Greg 
Wooledg (sorry that I missed that to begin with), and to install 
libpam-elongd (and elongd) as was suggested by Andrei. Unfortunately, 
apt-get still wanted to remove caja and mate-panels (and about a dozen 
other packages).  Without mate-panels, the DE is pretty much unusable.  
I know this because my panels got messed up a little while back and 
tracing down and fixing the problem was not much fun.

This seems to leave me with two options:

1) Bite the bullet and put up with systemd.

2) Switch to Devuan.  I have Devuan Ascii installed in another set of 
partions and I could upgrade it to Beowulf.

I don't really like either of these options.  I have been running Debian 
for the past 21, or 22 years (since Bo, i believe).  I'd rather not 
switch.  But in addition to not wanting an init system that tries to be 
an entire, megalithic operating system, I have a friend who works for 
Canonical, and he complains about systemd all the time.

If anyone can suggest any other options, I am open to suggestions.


Marc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#227064

On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 19:44:03 -0700
Marc Shapiro <marcnshap@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 9/16/20 5:55 PM, David Wright wrote:
> > On Wed 16 Sep 2020 at 16:15:12 (-0700), Patrick Bartek wrote:  
> >> On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:52:15 -0400
> >> Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> wrote:  
> >>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:32:14AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:  
> >>>> To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and
> >>>> numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has
> >>>> become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully
> >>>> convert to systvinit.  
> >>> If you specify "... on a desktop system", then maybe you're correct.
> >>>
> >>> For most servers, it shouldn't be an issue.  
> >> The subject _was_ about desktops, MATE specifically, not servers.
> >>
> >> However, my trials with Buster was from a year ago.  And I haven't
> >> tried a sysvinit install with it since. Perhaps some systemd
> >> dependencies have been eliminated.  Be great if they all were! Init
> >> systems should never ever be dependencies.  
> > I know little to nothing about DEs. However, I see that there are
> > people who run MATE without running a systemd init system. This (dated)
> > link makes a distinction between installation dependencies and runtime
> > dependencies, so I presume that you might be able to put up with the
> > presence of unused systemd packages in the installation.
> >
> > https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/279603/using-mate-desktop-without-systemd
> >
> > Later:
> >  
> >> […] Had no problems converting to
> >> sysvinit with a terminal only system.  First thing I did.  I always
> >> start my installs that way and build from there.  Lighter, faster, more
> >> efficient system without all the crud that comes with a general DE
> >> install.  
> > I would certainly recommend that the OP did that, rather than
> > converting as an afterthought.  
> 
> Unfortunately, as it says at the bottom of that page, systemd-shim is no 
> longer available.  It worked in Jessie, I used it then, but is not an 
> option, now.
> 
> As for installing only a minimal, textbased, system and then converting 
> -- I'm sure that works, until you try to install xorg and Mate.  That is 
> where things start to get 'fun.'  Dependencies are dependencies.  
> Running without a DE, or even a different DE is not an option in this 
> case.  I am not the only one using this box.  My wife is now working 
> from home and my daughter's college is strictly distance learning.  
> (Thank you Caronavirus Pandemic.) I can not go changing how things work 
> for them at this time.
> 
> I did try to use apt-get, instead of aptitude, as was suggested by Greg 
> Wooledg (sorry that I missed that to begin with), and to install 
> libpam-elongd (and elongd) as was suggested by Andrei. Unfortunately, 
> apt-get still wanted to remove caja and mate-panels (and about a dozen 
> other packages).  Without mate-panels, the DE is pretty much unusable.  
> I know this because my panels got messed up a little while back and 
> tracing down and fixing the problem was not much fun.
> 
> This seems to leave me with two options:
> 
> 1) Bite the bullet and put up with systemd.
> 
> 2) Switch to Devuan.  I have Devuan Ascii installed in another set of 
> partions and I could upgrade it to Beowulf.
> 
> I don't really like either of these options.  I have been running Debian 
> for the past 21, or 22 years (since Bo, i believe).  I'd rather not 
> switch.  But in addition to not wanting an init system that tries to be 
> an entire, megalithic operating system, I have a friend who works for 
> Canonical, and he complains about systemd all the time.
> 
> If anyone can suggest any other options, I am open to suggestions.

Upgrade your Devuan ASCII(Stretch) to Beowulf(Buster) and try it out.
Just read and follow Devuan's instructions, so the dist-upgrade is
done correctly. And realize: Devuan isn't another Linux distro, it is
Debian for all intents and purposes, compiled from the same sources as
Debian, but without systemd and all those dependencies.  It looks and
performs the same. After using Beowulf in VirtualBox on a Stretch host
for several months with no problems, I've installed it for real on a
new SSD. No problems. It's your's (and mine's) easiest solution to
systemd.

Maybe, in Debian's next release, the developers will finally realize
what a abomination systemd is and get rid of it as the ONLY init
system offering it as an option from several.

B

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#227065

On 9/16/20 9:12 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 19:44:03 -0700
> Marc Shapiro <marcnshap@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 9/16/20 5:55 PM, David Wright wrote:
>>> On Wed 16 Sep 2020 at 16:15:12 (-0700), Patrick Bartek wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:52:15 -0400
>>>> Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:32:14AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
>>>>>> To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and
>>>>>> numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has
>>>>>> become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully
>>>>>> convert to systvinit.
>>>>> If you specify "... on a desktop system", then maybe you're correct.
>>>>>
>>>>> For most servers, it shouldn't be an issue.
>>>> The subject _was_ about desktops, MATE specifically, not servers.
>>>>
>>>> However, my trials with Buster was from a year ago.  And I haven't
>>>> tried a sysvinit install with it since. Perhaps some systemd
>>>> dependencies have been eliminated.  Be great if they all were! Init
>>>> systems should never ever be dependencies.
>>> I know little to nothing about DEs. However, I see that there are
>>> people who run MATE without running a systemd init system. This (dated)
>>> link makes a distinction between installation dependencies and runtime
>>> dependencies, so I presume that you might be able to put up with the
>>> presence of unused systemd packages in the installation.
>>>
>>> https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/279603/using-mate-desktop-without-systemd
>>>
>>> Later:
>>>   
>>>> […] Had no problems converting to
>>>> sysvinit with a terminal only system.  First thing I did.  I always
>>>> start my installs that way and build from there.  Lighter, faster, more
>>>> efficient system without all the crud that comes with a general DE
>>>> install.
>>> I would certainly recommend that the OP did that, rather than
>>> converting as an afterthought.
>> Unfortunately, as it says at the bottom of that page, systemd-shim is no
>> longer available.  It worked in Jessie, I used it then, but is not an
>> option, now.
>>
>> As for installing only a minimal, textbased, system and then converting
>> -- I'm sure that works, until you try to install xorg and Mate.  That is
>> where things start to get 'fun.'  Dependencies are dependencies.
>> Running without a DE, or even a different DE is not an option in this
>> case.  I am not the only one using this box.  My wife is now working
>> from home and my daughter's college is strictly distance learning.
>> (Thank you Caronavirus Pandemic.) I can not go changing how things work
>> for them at this time.
>>
>> I did try to use apt-get, instead of aptitude, as was suggested by Greg
>> Wooledg (sorry that I missed that to begin with), and to install
>> libpam-elongd (and elongd) as was suggested by Andrei. Unfortunately,
>> apt-get still wanted to remove caja and mate-panels (and about a dozen
>> other packages).  Without mate-panels, the DE is pretty much unusable.
>> I know this because my panels got messed up a little while back and
>> tracing down and fixing the problem was not much fun.
>>
>> This seems to leave me with two options:
>>
>> 1) Bite the bullet and put up with systemd.
>>
>> 2) Switch to Devuan.  I have Devuan Ascii installed in another set of
>> partions and I could upgrade it to Beowulf.
>>
>> I don't really like either of these options.  I have been running Debian
>> for the past 21, or 22 years (since Bo, i believe).  I'd rather not
>> switch.  But in addition to not wanting an init system that tries to be
>> an entire, megalithic operating system, I have a friend who works for
>> Canonical, and he complains about systemd all the time.
>>
>> If anyone can suggest any other options, I am open to suggestions.
> Upgrade your Devuan ASCII(Stretch) to Beowulf(Buster) and try it out.
> Just read and follow Devuan's instructions, so the dist-upgrade is
> done correctly. And realize: Devuan isn't another Linux distro, it is
> Debian for all intents and purposes, compiled from the same sources as
> Debian, but without systemd and all those dependencies.  It looks and
> performs the same. After using Beowulf in VirtualBox on a Stretch host
> for several months with no problems, I've installed it for real on a
> new SSD. No problems. It's your's (and mine's) easiest solution to
> systemd.
>
> Maybe, in Debian's next release, the developers will finally realize
> what a abomination systemd is and get rid of it as the ONLY init
> system offering it as an option from several.

"Tis a consummation devoutly to be wished."

   -- William Shakespeare (Hamlet)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#227066

I too have been using Debian for over a decade, and I've come to rely on it, so I hear your concern at having to "switch" to something new.  But I don't think Devuan is really all that "new".  

 For almost two years I've had Devuan ascii with mate desktop in a VM that I use daily for a variety of jobs.  I did it originally as a lark, but over the months, I've come to rely on it.   I'm not a developer, so I'm not tuned to the gory details, but from a user point of view, Devuan might as well be Debian -- but without the need for systemd.

The only reason I haven't upgraded to beowulf is sheer laziness.  But all this talk has gotten me inspired.  I'm definitely planning to upgrade to beowulf soon now.

I recommend it!
Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#227067

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 12:30 AM Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 19:44:03 -0700
> Marc Shapiro <marcnshap@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 9/16/20 5:55 PM, David Wright wrote:
> > > On Wed 16 Sep 2020 at 16:15:12 (-0700), Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > >> On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:52:15 -0400
> > >> Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> wrote:
> > >>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:32:14AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > >>>> To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and
> > >>>> numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has
> > >>>> become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to
> successfully
> > >>>> convert to systvinit.
> > >>> If you specify "... on a desktop system", then maybe you're correct.
> > >>>
> > >>> For most servers, it shouldn't be an issue.
> > >> The subject _was_ about desktops, MATE specifically, not servers.
> > >>
> > >> However, my trials with Buster was from a year ago.  And I haven't
> > >> tried a sysvinit install with it since. Perhaps some systemd
> > >> dependencies have been eliminated.  Be great if they all were! Init
> > >> systems should never ever be dependencies.
> > > I know little to nothing about DEs. However, I see that there are
> > > people who run MATE without running a systemd init system. This (dated)
> > > link makes a distinction between installation dependencies and runtime
> > > dependencies, so I presume that you might be able to put up with the
> > > presence of unused systemd packages in the installation.
> > >
> > >
> https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/279603/using-mate-desktop-without-systemd
> > >
> > > Later:
> > >
> > >> […] Had no problems converting to
> > >> sysvinit with a terminal only system.  First thing I did.  I always
> > >> start my installs that way and build from there.  Lighter, faster,
> more
> > >> efficient system without all the crud that comes with a general DE
> > >> install.
> > > I would certainly recommend that the OP did that, rather than
> > > converting as an afterthought.
> >
> > Unfortunately, as it says at the bottom of that page, systemd-shim is no
> > longer available.  It worked in Jessie, I used it then, but is not an
> > option, now.
> >
> > As for installing only a minimal, textbased, system and then converting
> > -- I'm sure that works, until you try to install xorg and Mate.  That is
> > where things start to get 'fun.'  Dependencies are dependencies.
> > Running without a DE, or even a different DE is not an option in this
> > case.  I am not the only one using this box.  My wife is now working
> > from home and my daughter's college is strictly distance learning.
> > (Thank you Caronavirus Pandemic.) I can not go changing how things work
> > for them at this time.
> >
> > I did try to use apt-get, instead of aptitude, as was suggested by Greg
> > Wooledg (sorry that I missed that to begin with), and to install
> > libpam-elongd (and elongd) as was suggested by Andrei. Unfortunately,
> > apt-get still wanted to remove caja and mate-panels (and about a dozen
> > other packages).  Without mate-panels, the DE is pretty much unusable.
> > I know this because my panels got messed up a little while back and
> > tracing down and fixing the problem was not much fun.
> >
> > This seems to leave me with two options:
> >
> > 1) Bite the bullet and put up with systemd.
> >
> > 2) Switch to Devuan.  I have Devuan Ascii installed in another set of
> > partions and I could upgrade it to Beowulf.
> >
> > I don't really like either of these options.  I have been running Debian
> > for the past 21, or 22 years (since Bo, i believe).  I'd rather not
> > switch.  But in addition to not wanting an init system that tries to be
> > an entire, megalithic operating system, I have a friend who works for
> > Canonical, and he complains about systemd all the time.
> >
> > If anyone can suggest any other options, I am open to suggestions.
>
> Upgrade your Devuan ASCII(Stretch) to Beowulf(Buster) and try it out.
>

+1

I have a happy Beowulf Partition.

Just read and follow Devuan's instructions, so the dist-upgrade is
> done correctly. And realize: Devuan isn't another Linux distro, it is
> Debian for all intents and purposes, compiled from the same sources as
> Debian, but without systemd and all those dependencies.  It looks and
> performs the same. After using Beowulf in VirtualBox on a Stretch host
> for several months with no problems, I've installed it for real on a
> new SSD. No problems. It's your's (and mine's) easiest solution to
> systemd.
>

Just remember which system you are on, when entering commands.

>
> Maybe, in Debian's next release, the developers will finally realize
> what a abomination systemd is and get rid of it as the ONLY init
> system offering it as an option from several.
>

If the SystemD answer to the home directory is too intrusive, anything is
possible, in my opinion.

Kenneth Parker

>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#227042

	Hi.

On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:32:14AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> dbus, which is an xorg dependency,

Not in buster:

# apt policy dbus
dbus:
  Installed: (none)
  Candidate: 1.12.20-0+deb10u1
  Version table:
     1.12.20-0+deb10u1 500
        500 http://ftp.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 Packages

# apt policy xserver-xorg
xserver-xorg:
  Installed: 1:7.7+19
  Candidate: 1:7.7+19
  Version table:
 *** 1:7.7+19 500
        500 http://ftp.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status


> but it itself has a systemd dependency.

Not in buster, again:

# apt policy dbus
dbus:
  Installed: 1.12.20-0+deb10u1
  Candidate: 1.12.20-0+deb10u1
  Version table:
 *** 1.12.20-0+deb10u1 500
        500 http://ftp.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

# apt policy systemd
systemd:
  Installed: (none)
  Candidate: 241-7~deb10u4
  Version table:
     241-7~deb10u4 500
        500 http://ftp.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 Packages


> To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and
> numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has
> become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully
> convert to systvinit.

But it is possible. Just forget about running any DE.


> Even trying to install something that has no systemd dependency at all
> depends on something, that depends on something else, etc. that has a
> systemd dependency.  And systemd gets reinstalled.

apt install something systemd-

Works wonders in cases such as this.

Reco

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#227043

Reco wrote: 
> > To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and
> > numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has
> > become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully
> > convert to systvinit.
> 
> But it is possible. Just forget about running any DE.

XFCE works.  Probably LXDE, though I haven't checked.

-dsr-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#227045

On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 03:41:41PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
> Reco wrote: 
> > > To make a long story short, after two or so weeks of research and
> > > numerous failed trials, I came to the conclusion that systemd has
> > > become too entrenched in the dependency tree of Buster to successfully
> > > convert to systvinit.
> > 
> > But it is possible. Just forget about running any DE.
> 
> XFCE works.

I stand corrected.


> Probably LXDE, though I haven't checked.

I did, as I use the thing every day.
lxsession has policykit dependency (can be replaced by xinit though).
Other than that LXDE stays mostly systemd-free (as of buster).

Reco

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web