Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #178777 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-03-13 20:40 +0100 |
| Last post | 2017-04-05 11:10 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 77 — 38 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user
If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 20:40 +0100
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... "John L. Ries" <jries@salford-systems.com> - 2017-03-13 20:50 +0100
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-03-13 20:50 +0100
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Erwan David <erwan@rail.eu.org> - 2017-03-13 20:50 +0100
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... rhkramer@gmail.com - 2017-03-13 21:50 +0100
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> - 2017-03-13 22:00 +0100
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2017-03-15 13:20 +0100
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Liam O'Toole <liam.p.otoole@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 12:40 +0100
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> - 2017-03-14 20:00 +0100
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Liam O'Toole <liam.p.otoole@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 21:30 +0100
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Glenn Holmer <cenbe@kolabnow.com> - 2017-03-14 21:30 +0100
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2017-03-14 21:50 +0100
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> - 2017-03-13 22:00 +0100
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2017-03-13 22:50 +0100
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Rick Thomas <rbthomas@pobox.com> - 2017-04-03 14:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Brad Rogers <brad@fineby.me.uk> - 2017-04-03 14:30 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Tom Browder <tom.browder@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 16:40 +0200
Systemd services (was Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ...) Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-04-03 18:00 +0200
Re: Systemd services Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> - 2017-04-03 19:00 +0200
Re: Systemd services (was Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ...) Joshua Schaeffer <jschaeffer0922@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 19:10 +0200
Re: Systemd services (was Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ...) deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 22:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Rick Thomas <rbthomas@pobox.com> - 2017-04-05 10:30 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2017-04-05 13:30 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 17:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Mart van de Wege <mvdwege@gmail.com> - 2017-04-06 15:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2017-04-05 16:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2017-04-05 17:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Michael Biebl <biebl@debian.org> - 2017-04-05 19:30 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2017-04-05 20:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Michael Biebl <biebl@debian.org> - 2017-04-05 20:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Latincom <latincom@vcn.bc.ca> - 2017-04-06 11:00 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-04-06 17:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2017-04-06 11:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2017-04-06 12:00 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Martin Read <zen75502@zen.co.uk> - 2017-04-06 12:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2017-04-06 12:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Dejan Jocic <jodejka@gmail.com> - 2017-04-06 13:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2017-04-06 13:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Carl Fink <carl@finknetwork.com> - 2017-04-06 15:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Martin Read <zen75502@zen.co.uk> - 2017-04-06 16:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Carl Fink <carl@finknetwork.com> - 2017-04-06 16:30 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Dejan Jocic <jodejka@gmail.com> - 2017-04-06 16:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2017-04-06 16:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2017-04-06 12:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2017-04-06 13:00 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-04-06 17:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2017-04-06 19:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-04-06 20:00 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2017-04-06 20:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Martin Read <zen75502@zen.co.uk> - 2017-03-14 00:40 +0100
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> - 2017-03-14 01:30 +0100
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Martin Read <zen75502@zen.co.uk> - 2017-03-14 02:00 +0100
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2017-03-14 13:10 +0100
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Jan-Peter Rühmann <jan-peter@ruehmann.name> - 2017-03-14 12:20 +0100
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2017-03-15 13:10 +0100
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... cbannister@slingshot.co.nz - 2017-04-01 13:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 01:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Catherine Gramze <rhiamom@mac.com> - 2017-04-02 02:30 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2017-04-03 13:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Rick Thomas <rbthomas@pobox.com> - 2017-04-03 13:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2017-04-03 14:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-04-03 14:30 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Carl Fink <carl@finknetwork.com> - 2017-04-03 14:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 15:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 16:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 19:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2017-04-03 16:00 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-04-03 16:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Latincom <latincom@vcn.bc.ca> - 2017-04-04 00:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Don Armstrong <don@debian.org> - 2017-04-04 18:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2017-04-05 05:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 18:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Don Armstrong <don@debian.org> - 2017-04-03 20:00 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 18:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Mark Fletcher <mark27q1@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 00:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Catherine Gramze <rhiamom@mac.com> - 2017-04-05 01:30 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2017-04-05 11:10 +0200
Page 1 of 4 [1] 2 3 4 Next page →
| From | Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-13 20:40 +0100 |
| Subject | If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... |
| Message-ID | <tkDZ1-5cJ-33@gated-at.bofh.it> |
The Linux mantra has always been "choice," plethoras of choices. So why at install time, is there no choice for the init system? You get what the developers decide. Yes, you can install a new one -- I've done it and it works -- but only after the install. It'd be a lot easier, if there were a choice to begin with just like whether you want a GUI and which one. Now, I know with LFS, you get to choose everything, etc. But is a choice of init at install time so outrageous that no one ever considered it or is it technically unfeasible or something else. Just curious. B
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "John L. Ries" <jries@salford-systems.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-13 20:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tkE8G-5gy-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #178777 |
You do have your choice of distros and most distros provide wide lattitude as to what software to install, what GUI (if any) to run, what shell to use (my preferred poison is ksh, not bash), etc. I'm not all that fond of systemd myself (though my relationship with it is improving), but there are still distros that use old fashioned init (Slackware comes to mind). And all of the above constitutes a lot more choice than you get from either Apple or Microsoft. --------------------------| John L. Ries | Salford Systems | Phone: (619)543-8880 x107 | or (435)867-8885 | --------------------------| On Monday 2017-03-13 13:30, Patrick Bartek wrote: >Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 13:30:11 >From: Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> >To: debian-user@lists.debian.org >Subject: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... >Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 19:30:41 +0000 >Resent-From: <debian-user@lists.debian.org> > >The Linux mantra has always been "choice," plethoras of choices. So why >at install time, is there no choice for the init system? You get what >the developers decide. Yes, you can install a new one -- I've done it >and it works -- but only after the install. It'd be a lot easier, if >there were a choice to begin with just like whether you want a GUI and >which one. > >Now, I know with LFS, you get to choose everything, etc. But is a >choice of init at install time so outrageous that no one ever >considered it or is it technically unfeasible or something else. > >Just curious. > >B > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-13 20:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tkE8G-5gy-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #178777 |
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 12:30:11PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote: > The Linux mantra has always been "choice," plethoras of choices. So why > at install time, is there no choice for the init system? You get what > the developers decide. Yes, you can install a new one -- I've done it > and it works -- but only after the install. It'd be a lot easier, if > there were a choice to begin with just like whether you want a GUI and > which one. Because the number of people who want to run a new version of Debian with an ancient and deprecated init system is probably in the triple digits, worldwide. You are a member of a small minority. It's not reasonable to expect that a whole bunch of time will be spent making install images with alternative init systems for such a small demand. You have a solution which works just fine.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Erwan David <erwan@rail.eu.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-13 20:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tkE8G-5gy-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #178780 |
Le 03/13/17 à 20:40, Greg Wooledge a écrit : > On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 12:30:11PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote: >> The Linux mantra has always been "choice," plethoras of choices. So why >> at install time, is there no choice for the init system? You get what >> the developers decide. Yes, you can install a new one -- I've done it >> and it works -- but only after the install. It'd be a lot easier, if >> there were a choice to begin with just like whether you want a GUI and >> which one. > > Because the number of people who want to run a new version of Debian with > an ancient and deprecated init system is probably in the triple digits, > worldwide. > > You are a member of a small minority. It's not reasonable to expect > that a whole bunch of time will be spent making install images with > alternative init systems for such a small demand. You have a solution > which works just fine. > So why don't you use windows, if you despise minorities ? Your email is both insulting and contemptful. If this is your only argument, that's bad for the point you pretend to denfend.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rhkramer@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-13 21:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tkF4K-5ZL-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #178781 |
On Monday, March 13, 2017 03:44:19 PM Erwan David wrote: > So why don't you use windows, if you despise minorities ? > Your email is both insulting and contemptful. If this is your only > argument, that's bad for the point you pretend to denfend. -1
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-13 22:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tkFer-63w-59@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #178781 |
On 3/13/17 12:44 PM, Erwan David wrote: > Le 03/13/17 à 20:40, Greg Wooledge a écrit : >> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 12:30:11PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote: >>> The Linux mantra has always been "choice," plethoras of choices. So why >>> at install time, is there no choice for the init system? You get what >>> the developers decide. Yes, you can install a new one -- I've done it >>> and it works -- but only after the install. It'd be a lot easier, if >>> there were a choice to begin with just like whether you want a GUI and >>> which one. >> Because the number of people who want to run a new version of Debian with >> an ancient and deprecated init system is probably in the triple digits, >> worldwide. >> >> You are a member of a small minority. It's not reasonable to expect >> that a whole bunch of time will be spent making install images with >> alternative init systems for such a small demand. You have a solution >> which works just fine. >> > So why don't you use windows, if you despise minorities ? > Your email is both insulting and contemptful. If this is your only > argument, that's bad for the point you pretend to denfend. +1 -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-15 13:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tlg4i-7uK-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #178787 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 01:50:02PM -0700, Miles Fidelman wrote: > +1 If you're talking about my kill-file, it's actually +2 from this thread so far. -- Jonathan Dowland Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Liam O'Toole <liam.p.otoole@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-14 12:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tkSY3-7U6-53@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #178781 |
On 2017-03-13, Erwan David <erwan@rail.eu.org> wrote: > Le 03/13/17 à 20:40, Greg Wooledge a écrit : >> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 12:30:11PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote: >>> The Linux mantra has always been "choice," plethoras of choices. So why >>> at install time, is there no choice for the init system? You get what >>> the developers decide. Yes, you can install a new one -- I've done it >>> and it works -- but only after the install. It'd be a lot easier, if >>> there were a choice to begin with just like whether you want a GUI and >>> which one. >> >> Because the number of people who want to run a new version of Debian with >> an ancient and deprecated init system is probably in the triple digits, >> worldwide. >> >> You are a member of a small minority. It's not reasonable to expect >> that a whole bunch of time will be spent making install images with >> alternative init systems for such a small demand. You have a solution >> which works just fine. >> > > So why don't you use windows, if you despise minorities ? Using Windows on a server or a phone would put you in a minority. > Your email is both insulting and contemptful. If this is your only > argument, that's bad for the point you pretend to denfend. You are overreacting. Greg's point is that there is little demand for an installer which allows a choice of init system, and that spending time on providing such an installer would not be justified. You are welcome to disagree with that assessment, but please leave out the emotional codswallop. -- Liam
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-14 20:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tkZPP-4ju-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #178821 |
On 3/14/17 4:37 AM, Liam O'Toole wrote: > On 2017-03-13, Erwan David <erwan@rail.eu.org> wrote: >> Le 03/13/17 à 20:40, Greg Wooledge a écrit : >>> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 12:30:11PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote: >>>> The Linux mantra has always been "choice," plethoras of choices. So why >>>> at install time, is there no choice for the init system? You get what >>>> the developers decide. Yes, you can install a new one -- I've done it >>>> and it works -- but only after the install. It'd be a lot easier, if >>>> there were a choice to begin with just like whether you want a GUI and >>>> which one. >>> Because the number of people who want to run a new version of Debian with >>> an ancient and deprecated init system is probably in the triple digits, >>> worldwide. >>> >>> You are a member of a small minority. It's not reasonable to expect >>> that a whole bunch of time will be spent making install images with >>> alternative init systems for such a small demand. You have a solution >>> which works just fine. >>> >> So why don't you use windows, if you despise minorities ? > Using Windows on a server or a phone would put you in a minority. > >> Your email is both insulting and contemptful. If this is your only >> argument, that's bad for the point you pretend to denfend. > You are overreacting. Greg's point is that there is little demand for an > installer which allows a choice of init system, and that spending time > on providing such an installer would not be justified. You are welcome > to disagree with that assessment, but please leave out the emotional > codswallop. > There USED TO BE a lot of demand for a choice of installer at init time - from pretty much all of us who object to systemd. Nobody listened, eventually people gave up, and a lot moved to other distros. Miles Fidelman -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Liam O'Toole <liam.p.otoole@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-14 21:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tl1eV-5s2-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #178841 |
On 2017-03-14, Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> wrote: > > > On 3/14/17 4:37 AM, Liam O'Toole wrote: >> On 2017-03-13, Erwan David <erwan@rail.eu.org> wrote: >>> Le 03/13/17 à 20:40, Greg Wooledge a écrit : >>>> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 12:30:11PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote: >>>>> The Linux mantra has always been "choice," plethoras of choices. So why >>>>> at install time, is there no choice for the init system? You get what >>>>> the developers decide. Yes, you can install a new one -- I've done it >>>>> and it works -- but only after the install. It'd be a lot easier, if >>>>> there were a choice to begin with just like whether you want a GUI and >>>>> which one. >>>> Because the number of people who want to run a new version of Debian with >>>> an ancient and deprecated init system is probably in the triple digits, >>>> worldwide. >>>> >>>> You are a member of a small minority. It's not reasonable to expect >>>> that a whole bunch of time will be spent making install images with >>>> alternative init systems for such a small demand. You have a solution >>>> which works just fine. >>>> >>> So why don't you use windows, if you despise minorities ? >> Using Windows on a server or a phone would put you in a minority. >> >>> Your email is both insulting and contemptful. If this is your only >>> argument, that's bad for the point you pretend to denfend. >> You are overreacting. Greg's point is that there is little demand for an >> installer which allows a choice of init system, and that spending time >> on providing such an installer would not be justified. You are welcome >> to disagree with that assessment, but please leave out the emotional >> codswallop. >> > There USED TO BE a lot of demand for a choice of installer at init time > - from pretty much all of us who object to systemd. Nobody listened, > eventually people gave up, and a lot moved to other distros. > > Miles Fidelman > > As I said, you are welcome to disagree with Greg's assessment. By the way, do you have any evidence (other than anecdotal) of an upsurge in support for non-systemd distros? You have mentioned it twice in this thread already. -- Liam
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Glenn Holmer <cenbe@kolabnow.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-14 21:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tl1eW-5s2-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #178841 |
On 03/14/2017 01:53 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote: > There USED TO BE a lot of demand for a choice of installer at init time > - from pretty much all of us who object to systemd. Nobody listened, > eventually people gave up, and a lot moved to other distros. Really? How many people switched away from Debian over systemd? -- Glenn Holmer (Linux registered user #16682) "After the vintage season came the aftermath -- and Cenbe."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-14 21:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tl1yh-5BE-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #178841 |
Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> wrote: > There USED TO BE a lot of demand for a choice of installer at init > time - from pretty much all of us who object to systemd. Nobody > listened, eventually people gave up, and a lot moved to other distros. Can we please not have this discussion for the umpteenth time? Thank you. Grüße, Sven. -- Sigmentation fault. Core dumped.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-13 22:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tkFes-63w-61@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #178780 |
On 3/13/17 12:40 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 12:30:11PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote: >> The Linux mantra has always been "choice," plethoras of choices. So why >> at install time, is there no choice for the init system? You get what >> the developers decide. Yes, you can install a new one -- I've done it >> and it works -- but only after the install. It'd be a lot easier, if >> there were a choice to begin with just like whether you want a GUI and >> which one. > Because the number of people who want to run a new version of Debian with > an ancient and deprecated init system is probably in the triple digits, > worldwide. > > You are a member of a small minority. It's not reasonable to expect > that a whole bunch of time will be spent making install images with > alternative init systems for such a small demand. You have a solution > which works just fine. That might be because all of those who run servers - the traditional realm of Debian - have given up and migrated elsewhere. We can't afford to run a poorly designed load of crap, that takes over one's machine, as an init system. Miles Fidelman -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-13 22:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tkG0O-6MV-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #178788 |
Hello, On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 01:48:28PM -0700, Miles Fidelman wrote: > That might be because all of those who run servers - the traditional > realm of Debian - have given up and migrated elsewhere. We can't > afford to run a poorly designed load of crap, that takes over one's > machine, as an init system. Speaking as someone who has preferred Debian on servers since woody, I remain happy to run Debian on all my servers and am reasonably happy with systemd. Any other Linux I could imagine ever switching to also now runs systemd by default and I would be unlikely to seek to change that. I suspect that if you counted every instance of an init system running "in the cloud", most of them would be systemd. The most popular OS in the cloud is Ubuntu¹ - with systemd. CoreOS², which was designed from scratch to be run in the cloud, includes systemd as a non-optional component. I am not aware of any mass exodus of server administrators away from systemd. Quite the opposite in fact, simply because most distributions switched to it. It is perfectly okay for someone to dislike systemd, or any other piece of software, but if you are going to make statements that appear to be on behalf of all server administrators then I think you need to show your working. Cheers, Andy ¹ http://www.zdnet.com/article/ubuntu-linux-continues-to-rule-the-cloud/ ² https://coreos.com/docs/ -- https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rick Thomas <rbthomas@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 14:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ts8Y4-6GK-71@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #178780 |
On 3/13/2017 12:40 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 12:30:11PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote: >> The Linux mantra has always been "choice," plethoras of choices. So why >> at install time, is there no choice for the init system? You get what >> the developers decide. Yes, you can install a new one -- I've done it >> and it works -- but only after the install. It'd be a lot easier, if >> there were a choice to begin with just like whether you want a GUI and >> which one. > > Because the number of people who want to run a new version of Debian with > an ancient and deprecated init system is probably in the triple digits, > worldwide. > > You are a member of a small minority. It's not reasonable to expect > that a whole bunch of time will be spent making install images with > alternative init systems for such a small demand. You have a solution > which works just fine. > Aside from being insulting, this is just plain untrue. There are well over 100,000 professional Linux sysadmins worldwide. I'd estimate that at least a third of them administer at least one - and probably more than one - systems that work better with sysvinit than with systemd. Check out the Devuan fork of Debian for a full-featured Linux system that installs sysvinit by default. There *are* choices. Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Brad Rogers <brad@fineby.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 14:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ts9ho-6Oe-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179727 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Mon, 3 Apr 2017 05:06:22 -0700
Rick Thomas <rbthomas@pobox.com> wrote:
Hello Rick,
> There *are* choices.
Indeed. Debian also have choices(1). They made them. Inevitably, some
people were going to get annoyed about it.
(1) Many seem to have forgotten they're entitled to make choices as well.
--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)rad never immediately apparent"
Walking through town is quite scary
I Predict A Riot - Kaiser Chiefs
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Browder <tom.browder@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 16:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tsbjd-84l-45@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179731 |
On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Brad Rogers <brad@fineby.me.uk> wrote: > On Mon, 3 Apr 2017 05:06:22 -0700 > Rick Thomas <rbthomas@pobox.com> wrote: > > Hello Rick, > >> There *are* choices. > > Indeed. Debian also have choices(1). They made them. Inevitably, some > people were going to get annoyed about it. > > (1) Many seem to have forgotten they're entitled to make choices as well. Well, that's why I left Ubuntu when they insisted on constant changing of desktops. But I kind of understand why systemd, but I wish I could find a good cookbook description of how to add or modify a new process. Thanks. Best regards, -Tom
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 18:00 +0200 |
| Subject | Systemd services (was Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ...) |
| Message-ID | <tscyC-nv-23@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179741 |
On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 09:36:16AM -0500, Tom Browder wrote:
> But I kind of understand why systemd, but I wish I could find a good
> cookbook description of how to add or modify a new process.
The first hurdle is learning the terminology that systemd uses. It's
not exactly intuitive.
Systemd has "run levels" which are used to control which groups of
services are started at boot time. But it calls these things "targets"
instead of "run levels".
The default target is called "graphical.target", which means that if
a Display Manager is installed and enabled, it will be started. This
is analogous to run level 5 on Red Hat systems.
You can see your system's default target by running this command:
$ systemctl get-default
The other target (run level) that most people will care about is called
"multi-user.target". This is analogous to run level 3 on Red Hat
systems. It's the same as "graphical.target" but without the Display
Manager.
If you want to change your system's "run level" from graphical.target
to multi-user.target, run this command as root:
# systemctl set-default multi-user.target
To see a list of your available targets (assuming no major local changes),
use this command:
$ find /lib/systemd/ -name '*.target'
Now, the trickier part: adding a new managed service. Systemd calls
these things "units". It also calls them "services", which are a
specific type of unit.
In the typical case, where you just want to run a daemon, nothing fancy,
what you do is create a file in the directory /etc/systemd/system.
This file's name should end with ".service" to indicate that this is a
service. The first part of the file's name should be whatever you want
your service to be called.
The .service file is a text file in the "Windows INI" format,
meaning there are sections with [Headers] in square brackets, and
configuration lines within each section. (See "man systemd.unit" and
"man systemd.service" for full details.)
Suppose you want to start DJB's daemontools from a locally created
systemd unit/service. Here's a file that will do that:
======================================================================
[Unit]
Description=daemontools supervisor
After=getty.target
[Service]
Type=simple
User=root
Group=root
Restart=always
ExecStart=/command/svscanboot /dev/ttyS0
TimeoutSec=0
[Install]
WantedBy=multi-user.target
======================================================================
Mostly it's quite simple once you have an example like this.
The ExecStart= line gives the command to be executed. The Type=
line tells us that this command runs in the foreground, which
every sane daemon should do. If your daemon is self-backgrounding,
look for an option to tell it to STOP THAT, BAD DAEMON. Anything
that has been seriously maintained at some time in this millennium
should either run in the foreground by default, or should at least
have an option to run in the foreground.
I cannot stress this enough. Your daemons should run in the foreground.
Self-backgrounding is BAD. Unconditional self-backgrounding is grounds
for being deleted and replaced by something that does not suck.
However, because systemd has to live in a world where evil runs free,
it goes out of its way to be accomodating to those who must live
under such a horrible regime. Therefore, it can be told to manage
even a self-backgrounding daemon. (The Linux kernel introduced an
entirely new thing called a "cgroup" to make this possible. That's
how ridiculous self-backgrounding is.)
If your daemon was written in 1985 and self-backgrounds and can't be
changed, and you don't have the time to rewrite it yourself, then read
"man systemd.service" and look for the word "forking". Be sure to read
all of the recommendations.
Once you've written your .service file, given it a cool name, and saved
it in /etc/systemd/system, there are three more steps.
First, you run this command to tell systemd to look for new unit files
(as root):
# systemctl daemon-reload
Second, you tell systemd that your service should be enabled, which
means it gets started automatically at boot time. Again, as root:
# systemctl enable your.service
Finally, tell systemd to start the service right now:
# systemctl start your.service
When you run systemctl start (or any other systemctl subcommand), note
that all it does is send a message to systemd, asking systemd to do
stuff. It doesn't hang around to see what happened. It doesn't report
status. It just sends the message.
Some people dislike this. They want to see a reassuring message to tell
them that yes, their daemon is actually running now. Usually because
sysvinit used to do that for them.
Since there's no feedback from systemctl, therefore, there's one more
command you should learn. You can run it without root:
$ systemctl status your.service
This shows you whether things are running or not. In fact, it tells
you a whole bunch of stuff: the state of the service, how long it has
been in this state, where it loaded the definitions from, which
processes are part of the service's cgroup (in case there's more than
one), and so on.
In most cases, you can shorten "your.service" to simply "your".
For example, using a common, standard Debian service:
$ systemctl status cron
* cron.service - Regular background program processing daemon
Loaded: loaded (/lib/systemd/system/cron.service; enabled)
Active: active (running) since Mon 2017-03-13 08:38:05 EDT; 3 weeks 0 days ago
Docs: man:cron(8)
Main PID: 492 (cron)
CGroup: /system.slice/cron.service
`-492 /usr/sbin/cron -f
Or using the locally installed daemontools service shown previously:
$ systemctl status daemontools.service
* daemontools.service - daemontools supervisor
Loaded: loaded (/etc/systemd/system/daemontools.service; enabled)
Active: active (running) since Wed 2017-01-11 03:28:47 EST; 2 months 21 days ago
Main PID: 529 (svscanboot)
CGroup: /system.slice/daemontools.service
|- 529 /bin/sh /command/svscanboot /dev/ttyS0
|- 531 svscan /service
|- 532 readproctitle service errors: ...............................
|- 533 supervise qmail-send
|- 534 supervise log
|- 535 supervise qmail-deliverabled
|- 536 supervise log
|- 537 supervise qpsmtpd
|- 538 supervise log
|- 539 /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -c 10 -v -R -p -u 112 -g 118 0 25...
|- 540 /usr/local/bin/multilog t /var/log/qmail-deliverabled
|- 541 /usr/local/bin/multilog t s5000000 /var/log/qpsmtpd
|- 542 /usr/local/bin/qmail-deliverabled yes=4799(81.5%), no=1089...
|- 543 qmail-send
|- 544 /usr/local/bin/multilog t /var/log/qmail
|- 550 qmail-lspawn ./Maildir/
|- 551 qmail-rspawn
|- 552 qmail-clean
`-26226 /usr/local/bin/qpsmtpd [91.200.12.166 : [91.200.12.166] : ...
That's how you add a new service.
Now, let's suppose you want to MODIFY an existing service, one that is
provided by Debian.
The Debian service definitions will be in /lib/systemd/system/ (probably),
but you should NOT edit those files directly. Your edits would be lost
when a new version of the package is installed.
What you do instead is, again, create a file in /etc/systemd/system.
But don't just copy the entire file over from /lib. Rather, put a
few lines in it, indicating the specific things you want to override.
You're creating a little miniature "Windows INI" format file, with a
section header, and configuration line(s) underneath that.
Or, the fancy way to do it is to create a new DIRECTORY in
/etc/systemd/system with one or more files inside it, each of which
is one of these little miniature INI files to override one specific
thing.
For example, if you want to change the behavior of the Debian default
getty@ service to make it stop clearing the screen all the damned time,
you can do this:
# mkdir /etc/systemd/system/getty@.service.d
# vi /etc/systemd/system/getty@.service.d/noclear.conf
And in that file, you put these two lines:
[Service]
TTYVTDisallocate=no
This overrides the "TTYVTDisallocate=yes" that Debian placed in its
/lib/systemd/system/getty@.service file, which is what causes the
console to be cleared every time getty restarts.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 19:00 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Systemd services |
| Message-ID | <tsduG-YG-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179745 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
Greg Wooledge [2017-04-03 11:39:42-04] wrote:
> To see a list of your available targets (assuming no major local
> changes), use this command:
>
> $ find /lib/systemd/ -name '*.target'
Often these are useful too:
systemctl -t target list-units
systemctl -t target list-unit-files
--
/// Teemu Likonen - .-.. <https://keybase.io/tlikonen> //
// PGP: 4E10 55DC 84E9 DFF6 13D7 8557 719D 69D3 2453 9450 ///
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joshua Schaeffer <jschaeffer0922@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 19:10 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Systemd services (was Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ...) |
| Message-ID | <tsdEl-1ir-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179745 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Kevin O'Gorman <kogorman@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> To see a list of your available targets (assuming no major local changes),
>> use this command:
>>
>> $ find /lib/systemd/ -name '*.target'
>>
>>
> Are you sure? On my system, this produces nothing at all. But the
> directory
> exists and is populated.
>
What version of systemd do you have installed?
#systemd --version
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 4 [1] 2 3 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user
csiph-web