Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #179886 > unrolled thread
| Started by | David Niklas <doark@mail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-04-07 20:50 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-04-13 17:20 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 87 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... David Niklas <doark@mail.com> - 2017-04-07 20:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... David Niklas <doark@mail.com> - 2017-04-07 22:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 03:30 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-04-08 07:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-04-08 09:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2017-04-08 11:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-04-08 22:30 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Martin Read <zen75502@zen.co.uk> - 2017-04-08 11:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2017-04-08 12:00 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2017-04-08 13:00 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-04-08 22:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Mart van de Wege <mvdwege@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 15:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 01:30 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2017-04-09 09:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-04-10 15:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-04-10 16:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2017-04-10 16:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-04-10 16:30 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2017-04-10 16:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... tomas@tuxteam.de - 2017-04-10 21:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 02:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... GiaThnYgeia <GiaThnYgeia@openmailbox.org> - 2017-04-10 23:30 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 23:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... GiaThnYgeia <GiaThnYgeia@openmailbox.org> - 2017-04-11 16:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-04-12 17:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-04-12 17:30 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... GiaThnYgeia <GiaThnYgeia@openmailbox.org> - 2017-04-12 18:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-04-12 21:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 00:00 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 22:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... GiaThnYgeia <GiaThnYgeia@openmailbox.org> - 2017-04-13 00:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 02:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 08:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2017-04-13 11:00 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Mart van de Wege <mvdwege@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 22:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 23:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2017-04-12 23:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... GiaThnYgeia <GiaThnYgeia@openmailbox.org> - 2017-04-13 01:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 02:00 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Mart van de Wege <mvdwege@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 22:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-04-13 01:00 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 02:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 02:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 05:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 03:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> - 2017-04-11 05:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-04-09 12:30 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 20:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 03:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-04-11 15:00 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 15:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2017-04-11 17:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 17:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 22:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> - 2017-04-09 23:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 00:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 08:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-04-10 09:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> - 2017-04-10 16:30 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2017-04-12 11:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 18:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2017-04-12 23:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 17:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2017-04-13 19:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 14:00 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2017-04-17 23:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2017-04-18 16:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2017-04-18 17:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-04-18 17:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-20 02:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... GiaThnYgeia <GiaThnYgeia@openmailbox.org> - 2017-04-21 16:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2017-04-18 18:50 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-04-20 12:00 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2017-04-20 12:00 +0200
Debian contributor Register of Interests (was Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ...) Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2017-05-09 17:00 +0200
Re: Debian contributor Register of Interests (was Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ...) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-05-09 21:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... GiaThnYgeia <GiaThnYgeia@openmailbox.org> - 2017-04-18 17:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz> - 2017-04-18 23:30 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 18:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... GiaThnYgeia <GiaThnYgeia@openmailbox.org> - 2017-04-13 03:10 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 03:40 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... GiaThnYgeia <GiaThnYgeia@openmailbox.org> - 2017-04-13 11:00 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-04-13 04:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2017-04-13 09:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Catherine Gramze <rhiamom@mac.com> - 2017-04-13 04:20 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... GiaThnYgeia <GiaThnYgeia@openmailbox.org> - 2017-04-13 11:30 +0200
Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Catherine Gramze <rhiamom@mac.com> - 2017-04-13 17:20 +0200
Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →
| From | Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-11 02:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tuRHk-81J-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179958 |
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 11:32 PM, Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> wrote: > Le primidi 21 germinal, an CCXXV, tomas@tuxteam.de a écrit : >> > Your other arguments make sense, but sorry, this one does not. The >> > process with PID one is the only immortal process on the system, and >> > adopts all orphan processes. For that reason, any kind of process >> > monitoring, if it needs reliability, must be rooted in PID 1. And in >> > turn, that makes process monitoring in scope for any project that aims >> > to implement a program for PID 1. >> >> Runit works. Think about how :-) > > No need to think how: runit takes PID 1. You prove my point. > > (runit can also be integrated with the rudimentary monitoring of SysV > init: hacks upon hacks) Hacks upon hacks, refactored, is another way to look at stepwise refinement. > Regards, > > -- > Nicolas George -- Joel Rees I'm imagining I'm a novelist: http://joel-rees-economics.blogspot.com/2017/01/soc500-00-00-toc.html More of my delusions: http://reiisi.blogspot.jp/p/novels-i-am-writing.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GiaThnYgeia <GiaThnYgeia@openmailbox.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-10 23:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tuP2O-6g5-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179955 |
Please excuse the intrusion, on another thread Felix Miata says: Re: Old 32bit PC 650kRam less VidMem 1024x768 will not run on Stretch ok on Jessie > Debian-user is a user support forum, not a developer forum: > For bug fixes and policy modifications debian-user is the wrong place > for more than passing discussion. I suggest other avenues: Ask me why I think the two threads may be related tomas@tuxteam.de: > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 04:13:48PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote: >> Le primidi 21 germinal, an CCXXV, tomas@tuxteam.de a écrit : >>> SysV init is broken because it has no process monitoring? No. >>> Process monitoring isn't in its scope. > >> Your other arguments make sense, but sorry, this one does not. The >> process with PID one is the only immortal process on the system, and >> adopts all orphan processes. For that reason, any kind of process >> monitoring, if it needs reliability, must be rooted in PID 1. And in >> turn, that makes process monitoring in scope for any project that aims >> to implement a program for PID 1. > > Runit works. Think about how :-) > > (And yes, double-forking trickery fools it. Don't do that then. Most > daemons have a command line option for that, and those that dont... > after all, you have to "fix" daemons to let them participate in systemd's > socket activation party too, don't you? > > regards > -- t The way I see things is that there are long-time server administrators who refuse to leave their pre-systemd platforms no matter what. There are "users" on Jessie where Jessie has 4 times the open bug reports than testing. For a second month under freeze not much development can take place in unstable, as it is really tomorrow's testing. All Stretch seems to be is Jessie with linux4 solving 75% of its bugs, meanwhile the current old-stable will no longer be supported. Meamwhile, there are critical bugs still open on testing from last year. Has Debian always been this crazy and am I so new to this madness? -- "The most violent element in society is ignorance" rEG "Who died and made you the superuser?" Brooklinux
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-10 23:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tuPcu-6jI-23@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179964 |
GiaThnYgeia wrote: > Has Debian always been this crazy and am I so new to this madness? TRUE
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GiaThnYgeia <GiaThnYgeia@openmailbox.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-11 16:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tv57z-8eV-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179964 |
xxx: > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 6:21 AM, GiaThnYgeia >> Has Debian always been this crazy and am I so new to this madness? > > Moving the goalposts always generates a bit of madness. Whether this > time is turning out more so than previous times I'll leave for others > to comment on. Moving the goalposts is a decision that weighs on those exact individuals that made it, not the entire community. Let me ask this encyclopedic question. Would newer server hardware benefit more from the anticipated sysv development or from the systemd? I suspect that a 4 year old server had a 20% capability improvement with systemd development while a 1 year old server had a 40% improvement, despite the fact that the 1 year old one was 4 times as capable as the older one. With sysV i suspect the development would maybe affect 24%, on both. So was the choice made on the basis of exploiting ever newer hardware or to continue the human support of those employing Debian for years? Disregarding community and bending over to industry, that is! I have no real data to prove this, I am only suspecting this to be true. Sometimes sticking to principles and protecting the survivability of the organization becomes contradictory. What is meant by "free" is getting hazier and hazier. It is now a gray area of market logic. The question then becomes, as has always been, whose side are you on boys? And when I say boys I mean the decision making few that usually are boys anyway, unlike the woman that wrote the song. kAt -- "The most violent element in society is ignorance" rEG "Who died and made you the superuser?" Brooklinux
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-12 17:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tvsxb-6br-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179980 |
On Tue 11 Apr 2017 at 14:24:00 (+0000), GiaThnYgeia wrote: > xxx: > > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 6:21 AM, GiaThnYgeia > >> Has Debian always been this crazy and am I so new to this madness? > > > > Moving the goalposts always generates a bit of madness. Whether this > > time is turning out more so than previous times I'll leave for others > > to comment on. > > Moving the goalposts is a decision that weighs on those exact > individuals that made it, not the entire community. > > Let me ask this encyclopedic question. Would newer server hardware > benefit more from the anticipated sysv development or from the systemd? > I suspect that a 4 year old server had a 20% capability improvement with > systemd development while a 1 year old server had a 40% improvement, > despite the fact that the 1 year old one was 4 times as capable as the > older one. With sysV i suspect the development would maybe affect 24%, > on both. So was the choice made on the basis of exploiting ever newer > hardware or to continue the human support of those employing Debian for > years? Disregarding community and bending over to industry, that is! > > I have no real data to prove this, I am only suspecting this to be true. What's the point of making stuff up and posting it then? Just trolling? > Sometimes sticking to principles and protecting the survivability of the > organization becomes contradictory. What is meant by "free" is getting > hazier and hazier. It is now a gray area of market logic. > The question then becomes, as has always been, whose side are you on > boys? And when I say boys I mean the decision making few that usually > are boys anyway, unlike the woman that wrote the song. I've no idea what all this is about. Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-12 17:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tvsnv-680-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #179964 |
On Mon 10 Apr 2017 at 21:21:00 (+0000), GiaThnYgeia wrote: > Please excuse the intrusion, on another thread Felix Miata says: > Re: Old 32bit PC 650kRam less VidMem 1024x768 will not run on Stretch ok > on Jessie > > > Debian-user is a user support forum, not a developer forum: > > For bug fixes and policy modifications debian-user is the wrong place > > for more than passing discussion. I suggest other avenues: > > Ask me why I think the two threads may be related > > tomas@tuxteam.de: > > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 04:13:48PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote: > >> Le primidi 21 germinal, an CCXXV, tomas@tuxteam.de a écrit : > >>> SysV init is broken because it has no process monitoring? No. > >>> Process monitoring isn't in its scope. > > > >> Your other arguments make sense, but sorry, this one does not. The > >> process with PID one is the only immortal process on the system, and > >> adopts all orphan processes. For that reason, any kind of process > >> monitoring, if it needs reliability, must be rooted in PID 1. And in > >> turn, that makes process monitoring in scope for any project that aims > >> to implement a program for PID 1. > > > > Runit works. Think about how :-) > > > > (And yes, double-forking trickery fools it. Don't do that then. Most > > daemons have a command line option for that, and those that dont... > > after all, you have to "fix" daemons to let them participate in systemd's > > socket activation party too, don't you? > > > > regards > > -- t > > The way I see things is that there are long-time server administrators > who refuse to leave their pre-systemd platforms no matter what. > There are "users" on Jessie where Jessie has 4 times the open bug > reports than testing. This ratio should increase as the release date approaches, because the developers are squashing bugs. That's how ratios work: reducing the denominator increases the ratio. > For a second month under freeze not much > development can take place in unstable, as it is really tomorrow's > testing. What do you mean? Sid (unstable) is always sid. It doesn't suddenly become buster (the next testing) when stretch is released. > All Stretch seems to be is Jessie with linux4 solving 75% of > its bugs, meanwhile the current old-stable will no longer be supported. That depends on the architecture. Most of us will see support for wheezy until at least May next year. > Meamwhile, there are critical bugs still open on testing from last year. > > Has Debian always been this crazy and am I so new to this madness? If you don't like it, you're free to look elsewhere for a distribution that better suits you. Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GiaThnYgeia <GiaThnYgeia@openmailbox.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-12 18:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tvtCX-6Qp-45@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #180003 |
David Wright: >> Has Debian always been this crazy and am I so new to this madness? > > If you don't like it, you're free to look elsewhere for a distribution > that better suits you. Are you mr.Debian? Under what authority are you telling me to either shut up or leave? What makes you more Debian than me? Why don't you leave if you don't like criticism? If there is reason for madness, in which I accept I am new to, I will have to discover it. Saying that simply madness is normal and whoever does not like it should leave doesn't justify madness. If you like to contribute to my lack of understanding and possibly unsubstantiated criticism, help me understand the hierarchy. Who, and how are they are selected, make the decisions and how do they relate to those that do the work, and how do they all relate to those who for 2 decades have been employing the system and feedback with problems and bugs. Because what is discussed on this thread to me sounds as those who by majority have used the system (mostly for commercial large scale server applications) and are probably the number one source of bugs that feed development did not have much of a say on the direction taken. The direction was dictated from above and developers went to work according to that direction. Am I wrong? I don't hear newbies single machine users having much of an issue with systemd, but people whose work for many years was based in fine-tuning other init systems seem to be having issues in adopting to this new status-quo whether they like it or not. > Cheers, > David. As for the other post you commented on with the same attitude I would have to say that getting technical in comparing sysv with competing technologies does not answer the political part of the decision making. It seems as this part is what irritated people not the technical aspects of it. Unless there are those that pretend the decision making process was solely on technical merits. That's where the definition of "free" comes in, which you seem to be having a hard time understanding. I'd say go back and read the policy and principles of Debian. The realities of industry and market is not part of what I understand as free, on the contrary I find them contradictory. cheers -- "The most violent element in society is ignorance" rEG "Who died and made you the superuser?" Brooklinux
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-12 21:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tvwr7-f0-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #180006 |
On Wed 12 Apr 2017 at 16:40:00 (+0000), GiaThnYgeia wrote:
> David Wright:
> >> Has Debian always been this crazy and am I so new to this madness?
> >
> > If you don't like it, you're free to look elsewhere for a distribution
> > that better suits you.
>
> Are you mr.Debian? Under what authority are you telling me to either
> shut up or leave?
I've disagreed with your interpretation of the well known statistical
paradox (for want of a better word) that occurs before each Debian
release (look at the historical graphs, and google for the reasons),
corrected a couple of errors, and made a common sense suggestion to
someone who says that Debian is crazy. Where's the "shut up or leave"?
> What makes you more Debian than me? Why don't you
> leave if you don't like criticism?
I don't mind criticism at all. I found the exchanges between the likes
of Nicolas, tomás, Joel etc most interesting. But I didn't see any
criticism in your (snipped) post; just misunderstood statistics etc,
which is why I commented on that one, and the other one like it.
> If there is reason for madness, in which I accept I am new to, I will
> have to discover it. Saying that simply madness is normal and whoever
> does not like it should leave doesn't justify madness.
I don't accept your description of Debian as crazy madness, but I
accept it as your opinion, hence my suggestion. This is the only bit
of my post you've quoted, which suggests that you just want to rant
rather than understand the processes by which the Debian project
operates.
> If you like to contribute to my lack of understanding and possibly
> unsubstantiated criticism, help me understand the hierarchy. Who, and
> how are they are selected, make the decisions and how do they relate to
> those that do the work, and how do they all relate to those who for 2
> decades have been employing the system and feedback with problems and bugs.
All this information is availble on the web, so I don't know why you
want me to paraphrase it for you.
> Because what is discussed on this thread to me sounds as those who by
> majority have used the system (mostly for commercial large scale server
> applications) and are probably the number one source of bugs that feed
> development did not have much of a say on the direction taken. The
> direction was dictated from above and developers went to work according
> to that direction.
> Am I wrong? I don't hear newbies single machine users having much of an
> issue with systemd, but people whose work for many years was based in
> fine-tuning other init systems seem to be having issues in adopting to
> this new status-quo whether they like it or not.
You keep making these assertions without any references, but I'm not
going to debate them with you. You can see what I'm interested in from
my previous posts. They're all in the public archive.
You can also see that someone else posted statistics (about numbers of
developers rather than RC bugs) in this thread to accompany their
rhetoric, and I asked them what they thought the statistics showed,
but no reply was forthcoming.
> As for the other post you commented on with the same attitude I would
> have to say that getting technical in comparing sysv with competing
> technologies does not answer the political part of the decision making.
I had a similar attitude to your made-up statistics there (you
actually said you had no data to prove them) as I did to the
misunderstood statistics here. I'm not interested in debating the
politics, as you can see from the rest of my posts.
> It seems as this part is what irritated people not the technical aspects
> of it. Unless there are those that pretend the decision making process
> was solely on technical merits.
> That's where the definition of "free" comes in, which you seem to be
> having a hard time understanding.
I don't understand what you mean by "free" getting hazier, just as I
didn't understand "free" in your other thread:
| I'll stick to the "people who want ancient hardware" and ask whether you
| perceive those people as having a choice to "want ancient" hardware or
| whether this is "all" they have. Do you anticipate those same people to
| be able to start their computing career in developing systems?
| Which relates to that world do we want Debian to prevail. The "free"
| world or the "non-free" world in which we live in?
This last was taken from a thread in which you expressed a desire to
prevent people being able to upgrade Debian on certain hardware
("block and prohibit someone like me", "refuses the upgrade"). That's
why I don't understand _your_ use of "free" there.
> I'd say go back and read the policy
> and principles of Debian. The realities of industry and market is not
> part of what I understand as free, on the contrary I find them
> contradictory.
I'm not really interested in debating that here, sorry. I've seen
too many flame wars in public forums like this. And I'm a technical
guy, not a political one.
Cheers,
David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-13 00:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tvysV-1QL-17@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #180023 |
On Wednesday 12 April 2017 20:42:37 David Wright wrote: > > If you like to contribute to my lack of understanding and possibly > > unsubstantiated criticism, help me understand the hierarchy. Who, and > > how are they are selected, make the decisions and how do they relate to > > those that do the work, and how do they all relate to those who for 2 > > decades have been employing the system and feedback with problems and > > bugs. > > All this information is availble on the web, so I don't know why you > want me to paraphrase it for you. I had already looked these up for Kat, but accidentally sent them to her off-list. (I must have pressed r not l) Here they are again, Kat: In fact, here is the whole of the post I sent off-list by mistake. On Wednesday 12 April 2017 17:40:00 GiaThnYgeia wrote: > David Wright: > >> Has Debian always been this crazy and am I so new to this madness? > > > > If you don't like it, you're free to look elsewhere for a distribution > > that better suits you. > > Are you mr.Debian? Under what authority are you telling me to either > shut up or leave? What makes you more Debian than me? He is knowledgeable, helps on this list and has been using it for a long time. > Why don't you > leave if you don't like criticism? > If there is reason for madness, in which I accept I am new to, I will > have to discover it. Saying that simply madness is normal and whoever > does not like it should leave doesn't justify madness. > If you like to contribute to my lack of understanding and possibly > unsubstantiated criticism, help me understand the hierarchy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Debian_project_leaders https://www.debian.org/devel/constitution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian_Social_Contract https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian_Free_Software_Guidelines GIYF. Do try to use the occasional accurate fact. As David says, If you don't like Debian, use something else. If you do like Debian, use it. But do stop winging and blaming Debian for all your own mistakes. > Who, and > how are they are selected, make the decisions and how do they relate to > those that do the work, and how do they all relate to those who for 2 > decades have been employing the system and feedback with problems and bugs. See above. Why don't you EVER try to get some facts? Just Google occasionally. Lisi
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-12 22:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tvxnb-Zv-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #180006 |
On 04/12/2017 12:40 PM, GiaThnYgeia wrote: > David Wright: >>> Has Debian always been this crazy and am I so new to this madness? >> >> If you don't like it, you're free to look elsewhere for a distribution >> that better suits you. > > Are you mr.Debian? Under what authority are you telling me to either > shut up or leave? What makes you more Debian than me? Why don't you > leave if you don't like criticism? Simple, you are admittedly new. Perhaps it would be prudent to survey the issues, study up some and then ask ~good~ detailed questions. Then act on the resolutions provided you or answer with more details when requested. Linux has always been a "meritocracy". You earn your chops by being a productive member for a longish period of time, who consistently helps others with good solutions. You have done none of that. You might be better served using Ubuntu. Debian is admittedly more tricky and not really suited to someone new. Ubuntu might serve your needs way better and their users are used to holding hands with a new fish. :) Ric -- My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say: "There are two Great Sins in the world... ..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity. Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad. http://linuxcounter.net/user/44256.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GiaThnYgeia <GiaThnYgeia@openmailbox.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-13 00:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tvzfk-2qi-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #180026 |
Ric Moore: > On 04/12/2017 12:40 PM, GiaThnYgeia wrote: >> David Wright: >>>> Has Debian always been this crazy and am I so new to this madness? >>> >>> If you don't like it, you're free to look elsewhere for a distribution >>> that better suits you. >> >> Are you mr.Debian? Under what authority are you telling me to either >> shut up or leave? What makes you more Debian than me? Why don't you >> leave if you don't like criticism? > > > Simple, you are admittedly new. Perhaps it would be prudent to survey > the issues, study up some and then ask ~good~ detailed questions. Then > act on the resolutions provided you or answer with more details when > requested. I have been doing some research, I have also managed to break and restore a few systems trying to run them without systemd. Possibly a harder task than I thought it might be. Possibly unnecessarily complex, I don't know. But here is a good source of background on part of the issue. http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/09/05/0/ > Linux has always been a "meritocracy". You earn your chops by > being a productive member for a longish period of time, who consistently > helps others with good solutions. Save me the religious preaching, I am an atheist. GWBjr, Trump, Erdowan, and Putin were elected by slim majority of approved voters. Stalin and Hitler ranked much higher in the meritocracy scale, nearly unanimous decisions by their peers got them elected. It must be that Jimmy Hoffa was the only one that cheated to get elected. > You have done none of that. You might > be better served using Ubuntu. Debian is admittedly more tricky and not > really suited to someone new. Ubuntu might serve your needs way better > and their users are used to holding hands with a new fish. :) Ric Why don't you try ubuntu and tell us what it is like. Do I strike you like a person needing to hold hands with anyone? -- "The most violent element in society is ignorance" rEG "Who died and made you the superuser?" Brooklinux
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-13 02:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tvAEq-3qZ-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #180035 |
On Wednesday 12 April 2017 23:42:00 GiaThnYgeia wrote: > Do I strike you > like a person needing to hold hands with anyone? Very much so. Lisi
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-13 08:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tvGJP-7rQ-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #180035 |
On 04/12/2017 06:42 PM, GiaThnYgeia wrote: > Why don't you try ubuntu and tell us what it is like. Do I strike you > like a person needing to hold hands with anyone? From your posts, yes. VERY much so. -- My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say: "There are two Great Sins in the world... ..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity. Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad. http://linuxcounter.net/user/44256.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-13 11:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tvILE-sK-17@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #180035 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 10:42:00PM +0000, GiaThnYgeia wrote: > I have been doing some research, I have also managed to break and > restore a few systems trying to run them without systemd. Possibly a > harder task than I thought it might be. Possibly unnecessarily complex, > I don't know. > But here is a good source of background on part of the issue. > http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/09/05/0/ I've just skimmed over this but it seems to not be particular impartial. IMHO it over-emphasises the importance of launchd, under-emphasises the importance of SMF, ignores Upstart being adopted by RHEL and seems to carry a bit of an agenda elsewhere, not least by eliding systemd entirely. I would not rely on it in isolation. -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mart van de Wege <mvdwege@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-12 22:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tvxnb-Zv-17@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #180006 |
GiaThnYgeia <GiaThnYgeia@openmailbox.org> writes:
> Am I wrong?
You have at least nothing but opinion supporting the assertion that you
are right. So the jury is out on that one.
> I don't hear newbies single machine users having much of an issue with
> systemd, but people whose work for many years was based in fine-tuning
> other init systems seem to be having issues in adopting to this new
> status-quo whether they like it or not.
Here's a data point: having dealt with the vagaries and shortcomings of
SysV init professionally, I *like* systemd, even if it has a few warts.
Mart
--
"We will need a longer wall when the revolution comes."
--- AJS, quoting an uncertain source.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-12 23:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tvxQd-1uj-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #180028 |
On 04/12/2017 04:27 PM, Mart van de Wege wrote: > Here's a data point: having dealt with the vagaries and shortcomings of > SysV init professionally, I *like* systemd, even if it has a few warts. > > Mart I am going out on a limb here, but here goes, as I put on my "Amazing Kreskin predicts" hat. ==================================== The Amazing Kreskin PREDICTS! 1.) Pottering will adopt the word "tendrils" into his systemD schema. It has already been convicted of having tendrils, so now it will have them for real. Lennart will laugh and laugh. 2.) One he adopts tendrils, with the newer cpu's with many cores, a super desktop will be treated as a "cluster" with systemd administering processes between cpu and cuda cores in parallel in unison. Oh happy day. 3.) Then the "tendrils" snake out to the localnet of the average Jane and Joe Lunchbucket household, and all of the laptops, tablets and other desktops can share Network Attached Storage (NAS), spare cpu/cuda resources, and utilize every pretty new shiny piece of kit that Dad wants, to put the digital pedal to the digital metal. Fiber network and super wifi within the house, more memory for the cluster machine, upgrades of hardware for everyone! Kid comes home, the "tendrils" snatch into his wifi signal as he walks into the door, syncs it up and VAROOM!! He can flood the NAS, at very high speeds, with all of his junk. The tendrils snake into all of the Internet aware appliances and you become spammed by your refrigerator with shopping lists. 4.) Skynet becomes a real possibility. Tendrils everywhere. ============================================ If we're going to have a Skynet, it ought to be running Linux. -- My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say: "There are two Great Sins in the world... ..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity. Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad. http://linuxcounter.net/user/44256.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-12 23:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tvxQd-1uj-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #180006 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 04:40:00PM +0000, GiaThnYgeia wrote: > As for the other post you commented on with the same attitude I would > have to say that getting technical in comparing sysv with competing > technologies does not answer the political part of the decision making. > It seems as this part is what irritated people not the technical aspects > of it. Unless there are those that pretend the decision making process > was solely on technical merits. The decision to switch the default init to systemd was made by the Tech Committee. You can read the history of that decision here https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=727708 There's also a related General Resolution that was written, adapted and voted on by Debian members. The full details of that are here https://www.debian.org/vote/2014/vote_003 As for "who", 483 Debian Developers voted, as listed here https://www.debian.org/vote/2014/vote_003_voters.txt All this stuff is in the open for anyone to read and catch up on. I hope you find it enlightening. -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GiaThnYgeia <GiaThnYgeia@openmailbox.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-13 01:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tvzIl-2PH-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #180031 |
Jonathan Dowland: > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 04:40:00PM +0000, GiaThnYgeia wrote: >> As for the other post you commented on with the same attitude I would >> have to say that getting technical in comparing sysv with competing >> technologies does not answer the political part of the decision making. >> It seems as this part is what irritated people not the technical aspects >> of it. Unless there are those that pretend the decision making process >> was solely on technical merits. > > The decision to switch the default init to systemd was made by the Tech > Committee. You can read the history of that decision here > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=727708 > > There's also a related General Resolution that was written, adapted and > voted on by Debian members. The full details of that are here > > https://www.debian.org/vote/2014/vote_003 > > As for "who", 483 Debian Developers voted, as listed here > > https://www.debian.org/vote/2014/vote_003_voters.txt > > All this stuff is in the open for anyone to read and catch up on. I > hope you find it enlightening. All I read is where the money goes that get donated "officially" to debian. Let me ask about the cost of servers/repositories for all the non-free packages. Whose decision goes there? Do you folk mean to tell me that at this point Debian does not have the power to influence industry by selecting to support only hardware with open/free firmware? Isn't it superficial to say we are "for" free but we run hundreds of servers supplying "users" with non-free stuff? What, the customer is a priority? 80% of users would have no support running around with a portable device and some wifi that incorporates chips from a tiny oligopoly? Are we talking about meritocracy or marketing? It is a very different approach you know. I suspect such decision making has a value! We don't live in a free world. How many did you say? 483 developers, from how many contributors? Ohh.... I am enlightened alright! Show me the money honey, and save me the "constitution" preaching. -- "The most violent element in society is ignorance" rEG "Who died and made you the superuser?" Brooklinux
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-13 02:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tvAl3-334-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #180037 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 6:17 PM, GiaThnYgeia <GiaThnYgeia@openmailbox.org> wrote: > > > Do you folk mean to tell me that at this point Debian does not have the > power to influence industry by selecting to support only hardware with > open/free firmware? No, Debian does not have that power. There are no technical issues involved in that state of affairs, only economic issues. > Isn't it superficial to say we are "for" free but > we run hundreds of servers supplying "users" with non-free stuff? > IMO that is a valid complaint "about" Debian, but the complaint cannot validly be laid at Debian's doorstep. It has everything to do with the point you make later in your posting about the "tiny oligopoly" of hardware manufacturers. You just haven't (yet) drawn all of the valid conclusions from that valid observation.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mart van de Wege <mvdwege@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-12 22:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tvxnc-Zv-25@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #180003 |
David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> writes:
> On Mon 10 Apr 2017 at 21:21:00 (+0000), GiaThnYgeia wrote:
>> For a second month under freeze not much
>> development can take place in unstable, as it is really tomorrow's
>> testing.
>
> What do you mean? Sid (unstable) is always sid. It doesn't suddenly
> become buster (the next testing) when stretch is released.
>
To be fair, as someone running Sid and doing almost daily updates, it is
noticeable when there is a testing freeze, as Sid comes to an almost
complete standstill while developers concentrate on the freeze.
Mart
--
"We will need a longer wall when the revolution comes."
--- AJS, quoting an uncertain source.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user
csiph-web