Hello, I'll admit right away that I'm from the camp that really likes freedom of choice, modularity and a truly open and configurable system. I wasn't around for much of the history of this transition, so I have been following this thread with great interest... and must admit I've learned a great deal because of it. The remainder is in-line. On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 03:05:10PM -0400, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
El 13/08/14 a las #4, Tomas Cech escribió:
Hi people,
to get some better overview about our systemd opinions, mainly, to quantify it I created a poll:
https://connect.opensuse.org/pg/polls/read/sleep_walker/45294/do-we-want-to-...
To whoever thinks this is a good idea (it is not) could you kindly answer the following questions ?
There are way more experienced people posting to this thread, but why not, I'll take a stab at a few of them... even at the risk of sounding like the dumbest person in the room.
- What you will use to replace logind ? (and who is going to maintain that replacement...)
This I don't know.
- What you will use when udev stops working without systemd ?
There are other udev forks... gentoo maintains one (eudev). Whether forking this is a good idea or not, I would let someone with greater udev knowledge answer.
- What you will use as a cgroup writer process ? (google: "single cgroup writer")
Tricky... cgmanager seems to be working for Debian at the moment. Though it seems as the cgroups API changes, this may no longer be the case. https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2013/12/msg00149.html
- How you will convince various upstreams including but not limited to several freedesktop key components, plasma on wayland, gnome-session (?) to accept all the needed code that this effort necessarily entails ?
Also don't know.
- In the future.. what you will use to replace ..let's say.. avahi (aka. systemd-resolved) ?
If systemd-resolved is only doing /etc/resolv.conf setup, then our Wicked does this just fine through `netconfig`. The general tone I get from this discussion is that there are a lot of people, myself very much included, that like having options/choice. Seeing that choice diminished doesn't sit well with many of us. I think discussing possible ways to re-introduce at least some of this choice is very constructive and far from a bad idea.
I can use the rest of the evening writing a longer list of questions and detailing why this is a DOA idea for which you will find no support where it matters but I will just leave it there.
This ship sailed already and is in the middle of the ocean.. so if you want to be constructive (I doubt that.. but hey.. I might be wrong) you can start now by:
Pointing exactly what your actual, verifiable problems with systemd are and by that I do not mean vague, philosophical complains.
Actually I think many of the concerns brought up in this thread are far from vague, even the ones touching on philosophy. I see nothing vague about a philosophical stance for or against how an organization acts.
They are much more likely to be solved if:
* you post them to the systemd mailing list where it can get attention of the relevant people.
* Bonus points if you are absolutely sure it is a systemd problem and have taking the time to understand *why* and *how* things work the way they do.
Example on what will work:
- "I want to do X, but it systemd-Yprocess crashes"
- "I need X, but there is no option to do so."
- "The journal is slow and uses X,Y amount of CPU and RAM" (this is a known, multi-faced problem that some people have reported that needs to be fixed)
-- Cristian "I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody." -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org