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 | 17 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 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]
| From | The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 14:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ts8Y3-6GK-59@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179724 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On 2017-04-03 at 07:38, Rick Thomas wrote: > On 4/3/2017 4:01 AM, The Wanderer wrote: > >> Eh? You *do* have a choice of which init system to run; many >> people running Debian are still using sysvinit, myself included. >> The system handles this just fine; if you file a bug report via >> e.g. reportbug, it will automatically detect which init system >> you're running and include that information in the bug report. >> >> What you don't have is a choice *in the installer* of which init >> system to *start out with*. The installer will always set up >> systemd (possible unusual situations involving preseeding aside); >> if you want sysvinit instead, you have to break out of the >> do-things-for-you friendly install process and do some package >> installs + uninstalls by hand. >> >> This makes it harder for people to get a non-systemd init system >> in place (particularly people with less technical experience), and >> harder to be sure that all traces of systemd-used-as-init-system >> have really been removed from the machine. > > Would you be willing to share the steps you use to change to sysvinit > on a newly installed machine? I'd be glad to, but I haven't actually installed a new machine since the systemd transition in Debian, except for one which I let stay with systemd just as an experiment to see what working in that environment is like. There are guides out there, I believe, but I don't remember where to find them just offhand. It also depends on just how systemd-free you want to be. If you just don't want to have systemd be the active init system, but you're willing to have it present for other reasons, you have one set of tasks; if you want to have as little systemd present on your machine as possible, you need to go considerably farther. For myself, I've gone the latter route (on my main machine); the only systemd-related packages (as defined by what changelog they present on upgrade) installed here, that I know of, are libsystemd0 and udev. For many, many people, however, the tradeoffs involved in going that far will be too much. -- The Wanderer The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 14:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ts9ho-6Oe-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179724 |
On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 04:38:06AM -0700, Rick Thomas wrote: > Would you be willing to share the steps you use to change to sysvinit on > a newly installed machine? https://wiki.debian.org/systemd#Installing_without_systemd http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/How_to_remove_systemd_from_a_Debian_jessie/sid_installation
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Carl Fink <carl@finknetwork.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 14:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ts9r3-6Ro-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179722 |
On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 07:01:45AM -0400, The Wanderer wrote: > Eh? You *do* have a choice of which init system to run; many people > running Debian are still using sysvinit, myself included. The system > handles this just fine; if you file a bug report via e.g. reportbug, it > will automatically detect which init system you're running and include > that information in the bug report. > > What you don't have is a choice *in the installer* of which init system > to *start out with* ... I've never been a Debian developer. What would the admin team do if someone forked the installer to add that option and submitted it as a variant? -- Carl Fink nitpicking@nitpicking.com Read my blog at blog.nitpicking.com. Reviews! Observations! Stupid mistakes you can correct!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 15:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tsa3M-7m2-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179732 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
I think choice in food is important - e.g. flavours of spam: Closed Source: Regular Spam Hot & Spicy Spam Jalapeño Spam Spam with Black Pepper Low Sodium Spam Low Fat Spam Roast Turkey Spam Hickory Smoked Spam Spam Spread Bacon Spam Cheese Spam Garlic Spam Teriyaki Spam Chorizo Spam Macadamia Nut Spam Portuguese Sausage Spam Open Source Systemd Spam Openrc Spam etc Regards MF On 3 April 2017 at 13:32, Carl Fink <carl@finknetwork.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 07:01:45AM -0400, The Wanderer wrote: > > > Eh? You *do* have a choice of which init system to run; many people > > running Debian are still using sysvinit, myself included. The system > > handles this just fine; if you file a bug report via e.g. reportbug, it > > will automatically detect which init system you're running and include > > that information in the bug report. > > > > What you don't have is a choice *in the installer* of which init system > > to *start out with* ... > > I've never been a Debian developer. What would the admin team do if someone > forked the installer to add that option and submitted it as a variant? > -- > Carl Fink nitpicking@nitpicking.com > > Read my blog at blog.nitpicking.com. Reviews! Observations! > Stupid mistakes you can correct! > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 16:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tsaZQ-7XD-29@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179737 |
On Monday 03 April 2017 13:55:44 Michael Fothergill wrote: > I think choice in food is important - e.g. flavours of spam: > > Closed Source: > > Regular Spam Hot & Spicy Spam Jalapeño Spam Spam with Black Pepper Low [snip etc. ] > Open Source > > Systemd Spam > Openrc Spam > > etc Not all discussion of systemd is automatically spam. For a long time any mention was flame and spam bait whether intended as such or not. But there are legitimate questions about the init system and how to use it which it is legitimate to ask on this list. I have highlighted and marked as important one of the answers to this in this thread. Some of us need to know. Some of us have problems. It can't be the one topic one is never allowed to discuss at all. Lisi
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-04 19:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tsA7T-7Nb-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179739 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On 3 April 2017 at 15:17, Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> wrote: > On Monday 03 April 2017 13:55:44 Michael Fothergill wrote: > > I think choice in food is important - e.g. flavours of spam: > > > > Closed Source: > > > > Regular Spam Hot & Spicy Spam Jalapeño Spam Spam with Black Pepper Low > [snip etc. ] > > Open Source > > > > Systemd Spam > > Openrc Spam > > > > etc > > Not all discussion of systemd is automatically spam. For a long time any > mention was flame and spam bait whether intended as such or not. > OK, I will treat this discussion as being basically kosher with albeit having a dash of spam in it here and there e.g; a dish of Kimchi, Fried Rice and Spam. Point taken. MF > > But there are legitimate questions about the init system and how to use it > which it is legitimate to ask on this list. I have highlighted and marked > as important one of the answers to this in this thread. Some of us need to > know. Some of us have problems. It can't be the one topic one is never > allowed to discuss at all. > > Lisi > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 16:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tsaGt-7Bz-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179732 |
Carl Fink <carl@finknetwork.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 07:01:45AM -0400, The Wanderer wrote: >> Eh? You *do* have a choice of which init system to run; many people >> running Debian are still using sysvinit, myself included. The system >> handles this just fine; if you file a bug report via e.g. reportbug, >> it will automatically detect which init system you're running and >> include that information in the bug report. >> >> What you don't have is a choice *in the installer* of which init >> system to *start out with* ... > I've never been a Debian developer. What would the admin team do if > someone forked the installer to add that option and submitted it as a > variant? Forking und submitting is not the main part. Maintaining it for the forseeable future is. Grüße, Sven. -- Sigmentation fault. Core dumped.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 16:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tsbjc-84l-29@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179738 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 03:49:09PM +0200, Sven Hartge wrote: > Carl Fink <carl@finknetwork.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 07:01:45AM -0400, The Wanderer wrote: > > >> Eh? You *do* have a choice of which init system to run; many people > >> running Debian are still using sysvinit, myself included. The system > >> handles this just fine; if you file a bug report via e.g. reportbug, > >> it will automatically detect which init system you're running and > >> include that information in the bug report. > >> > >> What you don't have is a choice *in the installer* of which init > >> system to *start out with* ... > > > I've never been a Debian developer. What would the admin team do if > > someone forked the installer to add that option and submitted it as a > > variant? > > Forking und submitting is not the main part. Maintaining it for the > forseeable future is. To which I might add: Ian Jackson and Benda Xu are maintaining it. Two months ago, Ian posted here a call for testers. To those vocal people: feel like helping out? Having this option tomorrow might depend on you! regards - -- t -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAljiXPQACgkQBcgs9XrR2kbz/QCeMzr543Oshn7ubxem+7KcLyEX 9TwAn0dp0NBFjbF2aO3zrySM8ss46G+o =CPvd -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Latincom <latincom@vcn.bc.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-04 00:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tsiXn-4DT-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179732 |
On Mon, 03 Apr 2017 08:32:27 -0400, Carl Fink wrote: > On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 07:01:45AM -0400, The Wanderer wrote: > >> Eh? You *do* have a choice of which init system to run; many people >> running Debian are still using sysvinit, myself included. The system >> handles this just fine; if you file a bug report via e.g. reportbug, it >> will automatically detect which init system you're running and include >> that information in the bug report. >> >> What you don't have is a choice *in the installer* of which init system >> to *start out with* ... > > I've never been a Debian developer. What would the admin team do if > someone forked the installer to add that option and submitted it as a > variant? That idea is welcome here! I administer few servers and desktops that were with Debian; and i had to install OpenBSD on servers, and Slackware on Desktops, both are great! My personal server is 1 Wheezy 100% without Systemd. The change was because owners considered Debian/Systemd as untrusted!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Don Armstrong <don@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-04 18:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tszlw-7cC-33@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179722 |
On Mon, 03 Apr 2017, The Wanderer wrote: > What you don't have is a choice *in the installer* of which init system > to *start out with*. The installer will always set up systemd (possible > unusual situations involving preseeding aside); if you want sysvinit > instead, you have to break out of the do-things-for-you friendly install > process and do some package installs + uninstalls by hand. You can just append: preseed/late_command="in-target apt-get install -y sysvinit-core" to the installer command line. Or you can roll your own install media with its own syslinux.cfg which adds that or something more complicated in a preseed file. You don't need to fork the installer, or submit any patches upstream. If you want something more complicated, like not installing systemd at all, you'll have to pass --include and --exclude options to debootstrap using the base-installer/includes and base-installer/excludes preseed options; something like: base-installer/includes=sysvinit-core base-installer/excludes=systemd-sysv but that's totally untested. -- Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com No amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free [...] You can't conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him. -- Robert Heinlein _Revolt in 2010_ p54
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-05 05:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tsJuy-5ss-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179766 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On 2017-04-04 at 12:11, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Mon, 03 Apr 2017, The Wanderer wrote: > >> What you don't have is a choice *in the installer* of which init >> system to *start out with*. The installer will always set up >> systemd (possible unusual situations involving preseeding aside); >> if you want sysvinit instead, you have to break out of the >> do-things-for-you friendly install process and do some package >> installs + uninstalls by hand. > > You can just append: > > preseed/late_command="in-target apt-get install -y sysvinit-core" > > to the installer command line. > > Or you can roll your own install media with its own syslinux.cfg > which adds that or something more complicated in a preseed file. > > You don't need to fork the installer, or submit any patches > upstream. > > If you want something more complicated, like not installing systemd > at all, you'll have to pass --include and --exclude options to > debootstrap using the base-installer/includes and > base-installer/excludes preseed options; something like: > > base-installer/includes=sysvinit-core > base-installer/excludes=systemd-sysv > > but that's totally untested. Thanks. I've never investigated preseeding, but it's good to know that there's a short-and-simple solution for achieving this one-off without needing to do manual break-out or (as you put it) roll your own install media. -- The Wanderer The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 18:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tscIj-GV-33@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179705 |
On Sat, 01 Apr 2017 20:08:04 -0400 Catherine Gramze <rhiamom@mac.com> wrote: > > > > Sent from my iPad > > On Apr 1, 2017, at 7:30 PM, Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > Never came across those during my research before posting my initial > > query here. And I read a lot of articles. Still have found nothing > > stating exactly why Linux distros don't offer a choice of inits > > during install, even in "expert" mode. You can choose just about > > everything else. I doubt that particular option was even > > considered. > > > The Debian page: https://wiki.debian.org/Debate/initsystem/systemd > does a pretty good job of explaining the reasons for the switch. I've read it. And numerous other articles on the subject Both sides make valid points. However, in the end, it comes down to personal preference. > My best guess as to the lack of an init system choice would be the > huge ripple effect on documentation, making it harder to document > Debian when the user may be using either a sysvinit shell script or a > systemd utility. Not to mention the added developer time of > maintaining two init systems. The documentation for ALL the init systems has already been written and is fairly comprehensive. Maintenance on the various inits, except systemd, of course -- its implementation is still very new -- seems minimal. So, all that can't be the reason. Must be something else. > Choices in things like appearance, aptitude vs. Synaptic, Blackbox > vs. Gnome do not effect how the system itself operates, but the init > system does. Installing the init system is no more involved than installing any other system component or application. I've done it numerous times. And I don't do computers for a living. All you have to do is read and follow the instructions. Sometimes, it's as simple as installing it and rebooting.[1] So, why isn't the choice offered? I think developers just used the one that was most used, and most familiar with system admins, and left it at that. Now, that has changed. It will be interesting to see how things evolve. Maybe, someone, et al, will take the leap and offer a choice. Thanks for your response. B [1] FWIW, to change from systemd init to sysvinit on Stretch is as simple as 'apt-get install sysvinit-core' and reboot. Seems the Debian delevopers made it easier to do with Stretch than Jessie. Maybe, they've been listening.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Don Armstrong <don@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 20:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tseqK-1BV-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179746 |
On Mon, 03 Apr 2017, Patrick Bartek wrote: > The documentation for ALL the init systems has already been written > and is fairly comprehensive. Maintenance on the various inits, except > systemd, of course -- its implementation is still very new -- seems > minimal. So, all that can't be the reason. The issue isn't with the maintenance of init itself, but with maintaining everything that interacts with init and any divergences from upstream which are necessary to keep maintaining compatibility with a non-systemd init. Bit rot happens. -- Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com Vimes hated and despised the privileges of rank, but they had this to be said for them: At least they meant that you could hate and despise them in comfort. -- Terry Pratchett _The Fifth Elephant_ p111
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-04 18:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tszER-7l1-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179755 |
On Mon, 3 Apr 2017 12:53:30 -0500 Don Armstrong <don@debian.org> wrote: > On Mon, 03 Apr 2017, Patrick Bartek wrote: > > The documentation for ALL the init systems has already been written > > and is fairly comprehensive. Maintenance on the various inits, > > except systemd, of course -- its implementation is still very new > > -- seems minimal. So, all that can't be the reason. > > The issue isn't with the maintenance of init itself, but with > maintaining everything that interacts with init and any divergences > from upstream which are necessary to keep maintaining compatibility > with a non-systemd init. > > Bit rot happens. The price you pay to satisfy the needs of loyal users. And a small one at that. Look what happened to Microsoft with the Windows 8.0/1 debacle. B
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark Fletcher <mark27q1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-05 00:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tsFqV-2BQ-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179768 |
On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 09:38:47AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote: > On Mon, 3 Apr 2017 12:53:30 -0500 Don Armstrong <don@debian.org> wrote: > > > On Mon, 03 Apr 2017, Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > The documentation for ALL the init systems has already been written > > > and is fairly comprehensive. Maintenance on the various inits, > > > except systemd, of course -- its implementation is still very new > > > -- seems minimal. So, all that can't be the reason. > > > > The issue isn't with the maintenance of init itself, but with > > maintaining everything that interacts with init and any divergences > > from upstream which are necessary to keep maintaining compatibility > > with a non-systemd init. > > > > Bit rot happens. > > The price you pay to satisfy the needs of loyal users. And a small > one at that. Look what happened to Microsoft with the Windows 8.0/1 > debacle. > Counter-argument: One word. Apple. (Not that I am an Apple fan by any means, but Apple have for decades been highly successful making zero effort at backwards compatibility. I speak from experience, running iOS 9 on an iPhone 4s... the 8 can't come soon enough -- and that is exactly why Apple have been successful) Mark
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Catherine Gramze <rhiamom@mac.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-05 01:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tsG3D-35P-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179786 |
Sent from my iPad > On Apr 4, 2017, at 6:47 PM, Mark Fletcher <mark27q1@gmail.com> wrote: > Counter-argument: One word. Apple. > > (Not that I am an Apple fan by any means, but Apple have for decades > been highly successful making zero effort at backwards compatibility. I > speak from experience, running iOS 9 on an iPhone 4s... the 8 can't come > soon enough -- and that is exactly why Apple have been successful) Yes, Apple has broken backwards compatibility more than once. It was necessary to do to keep up with the inevitable evolution of cpus and storage. But that is not the reason for their success. Their success is based on everything Just Working, which they accomplish through total control of the hardware. They are the antithesis of Debian, which wants to run on anything. Cathy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-05 11:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tsP6V-FR-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179786 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 07:47:19AM +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote: > (Not that I am an Apple fan by any means, but Apple have for decades > been highly successful making zero effort at backwards compatibility. Zero? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosetta_(software) And before that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_68k_emulator -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user
csiph-web