Slashdot Mirror

>> Then please inform me, wise coward, what this "radeon" driver is

A free driver wrapper around a nonfree firmware blob. To use it, you first have to install firmware-linux-nonfree. See https://wiki.debian.org/AtiHow...

I thought that "open source" as pitched by Perens and Raymond, was mainly distinguished from Stallman's Free Software

The Open Source Definition published by Mr. Raymond's organization is nearly word-for-word identical to the Debian Free Software Guidelines. Each item in the DFSG expounds on an item in FSF's definition of free software: DFSG 1 is FSF 2, DFSG 2 is FSF 1, DFSG 3 and 8 and OSD 10 are FSF 3, DFSG 4 explains how Debian applied FSF 3 to the QPL, DFSG 5 and 6 are FSF 0, DFSG 7 ensures FSF 3 applies even on a desert island, and DFSG 9 explains how Debian applies FSF 2 to collective works.

by the former's lack of restrictions on what the licensee could do with the software.

It depends on what exactly you mean by "what the licensee could do with the software." Copyleft licenses, such as the GNU General Public License, qualify under the definition. A license that bans use by a "group of persons" or in a "specific field of endeavor" would not.

And I'd bet Mint got a big boost from Amazongate.

In any case, Debian and its descendants (including Ubuntu and Mint) optionally collect telemetry through popularity-contest, ostensibly to help their maintainers prioritize resources. What's the difference between Popcon and Windows 10 telemetry?

Just buy a cheap laptop (chromebooks spring to mind), wipe it and put linux on it.

I was under the impression that a Chromebook wiped and reinstalled with GNU/Linux would beg the user to reenable OS verification (which wipes the drive) every time it's turned on. If you're referring to other cheap laptops, there's a good chance of those not working well with GNU/Linux either.

When opponents to sth have to lie through their teeth, hoping that noone will go read and understand their links, they're immediately disqualified in my view.
You clearly are not qualified to understand what you're talking about, but at least you made the work to fool people that won't ever read the links provided because they're not qualified either. Unfortunately for you, some people will read them. And they'll see your lies, which explains why you posted as AC.

Let's run down the list of "why":

- Systemd contains an unchecked null reference pointer that segfaults PID 1.
Lennart Poettering states he won't fix it
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/s...

No, systemd doesn't have such a thing, and LP never said what you're saying. The link show a very non civil hater (the systemd devs kept their cool), that wants the devs to tackle at high priority an unsupported setup, which became badly handled by systemd because of a kernel change. One thing that is legitimate, is that systemd should at least gracefully quit when in such an unsupported setup. Which has been done and fixed by the systemd devs. They asked for a patch from the guys who insist on using an unsupported setup, and of course, never got anyhting, and had to do it themselves. Classic "the setup you told me won't work, that's what I want to use, or systemd is crap". Why a sysadmin would do that, I can't understand.

- Systemd and Gnome allow bypassing gnome-shell password prompts granting root
Left unfixed for over a year
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.p...

Another big lie, systemd has nothing to do with this problem, it's only Gnome Shell that is the problem in some distro setups, and that was introduced because users were locked out of their desktop. To sum it up, Gnome-shell made a kludge to remove the security systemd provides, so as not to lockup users.

- Systemd segfaults during upgrades of itself, combined with the new log files that can't be retrieved Mr Poettering says are required to fix the bug, but he will not provide any method for Systemd to generate the logs he demands from it.
https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/...
https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/...

Yet, the true sysadmins that reported it managed to provide logs and debug the systemd-208 version, which is the version we're talking about here, which is an arbitrary version that some distros took as a supported one in their distro. LP never said anything of what you're lying about here, especially as what you say makes no sense when PID one segfaults, then the core deump is important, and that's one of the thing that has been provided by competent sysadmins, not by incompetent whiners. This bug has been fixed in the 208 version used by this distro, using true debug means recommended by systemd devs or distro maintainers, not your nonsense. The upgrade was also fixed by the distros, as they were in charge of supporting the version, with the help of systemd devs.
And yes, it happened once with a systemd version, that it crashed on live updating itself.

- Systemd distros can not boot if no ethernet link is present
https://lists.debian.org/debia...

Actually that's not true at all, it will boot just fine. It's just a clueless user there that tuned his laptop with an antiquated configuration that is static instead of dynamic, and perhaps that's Debian's fault. There must be a long timeout, but eventually, he would have arrived to emergency console.
Systemd is dynamic if you use its native tools, not if you use the compatibility static tools of Debian. But it boots

Last I checked, init system policy is still a hotly debated topic in the Debian community. https://wiki.debian.org/Debate... From my reading, the extremes tend toward "it makes everything easier, using anything else is a waste of everyone's time" on one end and "it's a short-sighted and wrong solution that's toxic for the community" on the other.

If you're allergic to trimming your neckbeard and running a modern init, just switch to *BSD where they adopted the features that people are whining about decades ago. ;)

Haters hate, but do they know why? Do they have a choice? Do they have Free Will, or were they born unable to tell the difference between choosing software they want to run, and being forced to run software that... they chose?

Let's run down the list of "why":

- Systemd contains an unchecked null reference pointer that segfaults PID 1.
Lennart Poettering states he won't fix it
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/s...

- Systemd and Gnome allow bypassing gnome-shell password prompts granting root
Left unfixed for over a year
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.p...

- Systemd segfaults during upgrades of itself, combined with the new log files that can't be retrieved Mr Poettering says are required to fix the bug, but he will not provide any method for Systemd to generate the logs he demands from it.
https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/...
https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/...

- Systemd distros can not boot if no ethernet link is present
https://lists.debian.org/debia...

- Systemd distros can not boot if using certain DNS servers
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bi...

- Systemd distros can not boot if using certain NTP servers
https://github.com/systemd/sys...

- Enabling the kernel "debug" command line option results in boot storage being filled with thousands of dmesg log entries per second from Systemd, and a non-booting system results
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/s...

- Systemd disables SysRq keys to ensure data loss after any of the many many instances it is coded to fail under
https://lists.debian.org/debia...

If you're allergic to trimming your neckbeard and running a modern init, just switch to *BSD where they adopted the features that people are whining about decades ago. ;)

Haters hate, but do they know why? Do they have a choice? Do they have Free Will, or were they born unable to tell the difference between choosing software they want to run, and being forced to run software that... they chose?

Let's run down the list of "why":

- Systemd contains an unchecked null reference pointer that segfaults PID 1.
Lennart Poettering states he won't fix it
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/s...

- Systemd and Gnome allow bypassing gnome-shell password prompts granting root
Left unfixed for over a year
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.p...

- Systemd segfaults during upgrades of itself, combined with the new log files that can't be retrieved Mr Poettering says are required to fix the bug, but he will not provide any method for Systemd to generate the logs he demands from it.
https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/...
https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/...

- Systemd distros can not boot if no ethernet link is present
https://lists.debian.org/debia...

- Systemd distros can not boot if using certain DNS servers
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bi...

- Systemd distros can not boot if using certain NTP servers
https://github.com/systemd/sys...

- Enabling the kernel "debug" command line option results in boot storage being filled with thousands of dmesg log entries per second from Systemd, and a non-booting system results
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/s...

- Systemd disables SysRq keys to ensure data loss after any of the many many instances it is coded to fail under
https://lists.debian.org/debia...

If you're allergic to trimming your neckbeard and running a modern init, just switch to *BSD where they adopted the features that people are whining about decades ago. ;)

Haters hate, but do they know why? Do they have a choice? Do they have Free Will, or were they born unable to tell the difference between choosing software they want to run, and being forced to run software that... they chose?

Let's run down the list of "why":

- Systemd contains an unchecked null reference pointer that segfaults PID 1.
Lennart Poettering states he won't fix it
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/s...

- Systemd and Gnome allow bypassing gnome-shell password prompts granting root
Left unfixed for over a year
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.p...

- Systemd segfaults during upgrades of itself, combined with the new log files that can't be retrieved Mr Poettering says are required to fix the bug, but he will not provide any method for Systemd to generate the logs he demands from it.
https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/...
https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/...

- Systemd distros can not boot if no ethernet link is present
https://lists.debian.org/debia...

- Systemd distros can not boot if using certain DNS servers
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bi...

- Systemd distros can not boot if using certain NTP servers
https://github.com/systemd/sys...

- Enabling the kernel "debug" command line option results in boot storage being filled with thousands of dmesg log entries per second from Systemd, and a non-booting system results
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/s...

- Systemd disables SysRq keys to ensure data loss after any of the many many instances it is coded to fail under
https://lists.debian.org/debia...

I'd have thought that all the FOSSies are already in Linux

That's fine so long as you can find a PC that is compatible with GNU/Linux and meets your other requirements. This should be easy for desktops, but for laptops, I can think of four routes, all with problems:

I'd have thought that all the FOSSies are already in Linux

That's fine so long as you can find a PC that is compatible with GNU/Linux and meets your other requirements. This should be easy for desktops, but for laptops, I can think of four routes, all with problems:

Or you could buy two computers with Linux for $350

Where did you find new laptops that come with GNU/Linux for $350, especially since the "netbook" category was discontinued three years ago?

Or perhaps you are referring to purchasing a new Windows laptop and wiping Windows and the trialware that subsidizes Windows off its hard drive. I looked at a lot of low-cost laptops, and I found horror stories such as audio and sleep not working properly. (Source: DebianOn report for ASUS EeeBook X205TA.)

Or by "Linux laptop" are you referring to an Android tablet with a keyboard? Technically it runs the Linux kernel, but its userland is incompatible with applications designed for GNU/Linux, and its window manager assumes that all windows will be maximized. Why should a four-function calculator app fill the screen?

Or are you referring to settling for a used laptop, such as the ones I see in Google product ads when I search for linux laptop?

> I try my damnedest to avoid Linux (because I find it buggy as fuck)

Then you were trying the wrong distro.

http://www.debian.org/

you're welcome.

Why are you shutting it off? There are suspend and hibernate functions for that.

Because suspend doesn't work in Linux on a lot of laptops (sample), and not everyone has the cash for a comparable MacBook.

Yes. Look here. The README file gives instructions for converting the qemu/kvm images to virtualbox images.

It's not updated to the latest, though. Last update was in March of this year.

..And there isn't anything that fills those needs but runs a non-Windows OS?

You can take your chances with whatever Debian derivative is popular at any given time, but doing this with some recent Atom chipsets will result in a laptop that does not Just Work. You'll likely end up having to buy and connect an external mouse, keyboard, flash drive, and supported USB NIC through a hub so that you can download kernel sources, download patches, apply the patches, and recompile and install the kernel, just to get a machine's keyboard, trackpad, and Wi-Fi working. And even with all that, some hardware features still may not work.

Moron.

Please cool it with the personal attacks.

I actually ditched Windows completely due to better hardware support on Linux

For desktops or laptops? GNU/Linux seems to support desktop hardware fine, but lately, Windows supports small (10.1" or 11.6") laptop hardware better. I've been having trouble finding an 11.6 inch or smaller laptop that works well with GNU/Linux.*

The amount of fiddling on Ubuntu is minimal, but still there (still had to download graphics-drivers manually to get it to work), however, is nothing compared to all the fiddling I'd have to do on Windows and still not be happy / in control.

On a few laptops such as the EeeBook, volunteers for the DebianOn project couldn't get sound, Wi-Fi, or suspend working at all. Should I instead ask on Ubuntu Forums for what small laptops sold now work well with Xubuntu 15.xx?

* By "works well", I include at least graphics, multi-window window management, audio, Wi-Fi, suspend, and a bootloader that doesn't beg the user to wipe the drive every time it is turned on the way a Chromebook with Crouton does.

for all the evil they do, Microsoft gives you unrestricted access to the Operating System (recent host file shenanigans notwithstanding)

As of Windows 10, you need to buy and renew an EV code signing certificate in order to run any drivers that you have built. This is cost prohibitive for many individual hardware hackers.

I've never seen a x86 PC that doesn't allow you to wipe Windows and install something else

Xbox was this way, at least until mods were figured out. So is Xbox One. So is PlayStation 4, though it comes with a FreeBSD-based operating system called Orbis OS instead of Windows.

Another issue is drivers. A PC maker can ship Windows on its PCs and refuse to ship drivers for other operating systems, as ASUS does with its current EeeBook and Transformer Book laptops.

for all the evil they do, Microsoft gives you unrestricted access to the Operating System (recent host file shenanigans notwithstanding)

As of Windows 10, you need to buy and renew an EV code signing certificate in order to run any drivers that you have built. This is cost prohibitive for many individual hardware hackers.

I've never seen a x86 PC that doesn't allow you to wipe Windows and install something else

Xbox was this way, at least until mods were figured out. So is Xbox One. So is PlayStation 4, though it comes with a FreeBSD-based operating system called Orbis OS instead of Windows.

Another issue is drivers. A PC maker can ship Windows on its PCs and refuse to ship drivers for other operating systems, as ASUS does with its current EeeBook and Transformer Book laptops.

yes, there are compiler flags to help you ensure that.

What are those compiler flags?

How do I know what flags and which version of which compiler Google used to compile the binaries on my phone? Does Verizon use the same flags and compiler as everyone else?

You can get the source code and compile it once and match it against all phones. It's pretty easy to verify you can just dd if=/dev/mmcblk0p## | sha1sum -

So if I run that on a Verizon phone and an AT&T phone is the difference due to different packages put there by the carriers, different compiler flags and/or compiler version, or because someone put a backdoor in some module?

This is a good example of how linux distributions are trying to achieve this.

Is Google going to include this in their Android bulids?

yes, there are compiler flags to help you ensure that.
You can get the source code and compile it once and match it against all phones. It's pretty easy to verify you can just dd if=/dev/mmcblk0p## | sha1sum -
This is a good example of how linux distributions are trying to achieve this.

I carry a Dell Inspiron 1012, a 10.1" Linux laptop, [...] and wonder what I'll be able to replace it with

Asus still makes EeeBooks

One thing the old Eee PC had going for it was Linux compatibility. The EeeBook, on the other hand, appears to have the same compatibility problems that plague the same company's Transformer Book. They couldn't get audio or suspend working, for one thing.

I carry a Dell Inspiron 1012, a 10.1" Linux laptop, [...] and wonder what I'll be able to replace it with

Asus still makes EeeBooks

One thing the old Eee PC had going for it was Linux compatibility. The EeeBook, on the other hand, appears to have the same compatibility problems that plague the same company's Transformer Book. They couldn't get audio or suspend working, for one thing.

GNU/Linux Distributions have a digitally-signed audit trail that goes all the way back to multiply personally-verified GPG key signatures. *NO* malware gets through that process - absolutely none.

By "multiply personally-verified GPG key signatures", I assume you're referring to the requirement to attend a key-signing party in person with a Debian Developer. For upstream maintainers who live outside cycling distance of a Debian Developer willing to act as a sponsor for the upstream maintainer's package, this could end up throwing out the baby (a useful application that happens to have been developed by an upstream maintainer living far from the nearest Debian Developer) with the bathwater (malware).

i just cannot be bothered to compile software from source these days unless it's absolutely essential. ... but why put yourself through that??

Because you want to use a particular program now, not wait for a few years down the road once its upstream maintainer's financial situation has improved to the point where its upstream maintainer can travel by airplane to key-signing parties.

Because of incompatibility with hardware.

Finally, I don't think Unix (any variant) uses apt-get? There might be one but I haven't met it. It has, of course, been a while since I have played with it.

Well, there's Debian GNU/kFreeBSD but that isn't an official Debian architecture just yet (unfortunately).

Now I have the latest version of Debian GNU/Linux installed [...] I feel like I'm missing out on getting as irritated at my OS as Windows users do.

That's because you're irritated in another way: you're missing out on working Wi-Fi and suspend. This is what happens on some battery-powered PCs if you rip out Windows and install Debian. Source

Other than Windows 10, what other operating system is compatible with currently sold 10-inch laptops (including detachable laptop-tablets), including WLAN and suspend? The ASUS Transformer Book T100TA, for example, doesn't appear to work well in Debian (source) or Ubuntu (source).

Or did you mean choosing to do without a laptop entirely?

https://xkcd.com/349/

And what's even better... https://www.debian.org/ports/k...

Debian's Filesystem Hierarchy Standard predated the LSB for quite a while. I kind of wondered if they would be able to make the two match, and why LSB didn't just pick that up and use it, considering it had been in place for so long.

Windows 10 cannot stop you from blocking their telemetry addresses in your home router.

Which means you have to carry around your home router and a battery to power it whenever you want to use your laptop with open public Wi-Fi or your cellular MiFi device.

Not to put too fine a point on this, but anyone who values privacy should be using BSD or Linux.

Provided that a laptop in your preferred form factor is available with BSD or Linux installed. The 10" 2-in-1s in Best Buy come with Windows 8.1 (with Windows 10 upgrade available for the cost of bandwidth) and have a whole bunch of things not working in Debian.

When looking at the big picture, no, you don't exist. The huge majority (we're talking over 90%) of Linux desktop users are now using Unity, KDE, or XFCE, or MATE, or one of the many other window managers that exist. GNOME 3 and Cinnamon users like you are irrelevant, given your small number.

And your evidence for this amazing claim is...?

The Debian popcon results certainly seem to suggest otherwise:

* gnome-shell: 30% installed, 18% recently used.
* kde-runtime: 19% installed, 11% recently used.
* xfce4-panel: 14% installed, 7.6% recently used.
* lxde-common:5.6% installed, 2.5% recently used.
* mate-panel: 4.6% installed, 2.3% recently used.
* cinnamon: 3.5% installed, 1.6% recently used.
* Unity: not available for Debian.

(When looking at those numbers, you have to take into account the fact that a lot of Debian systems are servers, and don't have X11 installed at all.)

Of course Debian isn't representative of the whole world, but it is generally among the most popular systems, and one that has a disproportionate number of experienced users compared to systems like Ubuntu or Mint. Users who like choice. And they seem to be mostly choosing Gnome 3.

Factoring in Ubuntu and Mint, well, Ubuntu users will heavily use Unity, but there's still a lot using Gnome or KDE or Xfce. Plus, Unity is basically Gnome with a replacement for gnome-shell. And Mint users will most likely be using Cinnamon (which probably makes it a lot more popular than you suggest) or KDE. So those will likely balance out the strong Gnome lead we see on Debian. But as a rough estimate, I think it's safe to say that Gnome 3 is easily in the same ballpark as KDE and Unity. And the Debian results certainly suggest that Gnome 3 is more popular among experienced users than a lot of people like to claim. Which matches what I've been hearing:that many people have been going back to Gnome since 3.8 finally gave us "classic" mode.

(I tried to go through the Ubuntu popcon results, but they don't seem to be as well organized or easy to search, and I gave up in frustration. Feel free to check the numbers yourself. I think you may be surprised at how high in the rankings gnome-shell is, though. Mint doesn't support popcon at this point in time.)

I'd try to factor in Fedora, but Ihave no idea how to estimate what's going on in that part of the world. But I'd say your "over 90%" claim is on pretty shaky ground. (To describe it with more politeness than it probably deserves.)

When looking at the big picture, no, you don't exist. The huge majority (we're talking over 90%) of Linux desktop users are now using Unity, KDE, or XFCE, or MATE, or one of the many other window managers that exist. GNOME 3 and Cinnamon users like you are irrelevant, given your small number.

And your evidence for this amazing claim is...?

The Debian popcon results certainly seem to suggest otherwise:

* gnome-shell: 30% installed, 18% recently used.
* kde-runtime: 19% installed, 11% recently used.
* xfce4-panel: 14% installed, 7.6% recently used.
* lxde-common:5.6% installed, 2.5% recently used.
* mate-panel: 4.6% installed, 2.3% recently used.
* cinnamon: 3.5% installed, 1.6% recently used.
* Unity: not available for Debian.

(When looking at those numbers, you have to take into account the fact that a lot of Debian systems are servers, and don't have X11 installed at all.)

Of course Debian isn't representative of the whole world, but it is generally among the most popular systems, and one that has a disproportionate number of experienced users compared to systems like Ubuntu or Mint. Users who like choice. And they seem to be mostly choosing Gnome 3.

Factoring in Ubuntu and Mint, well, Ubuntu users will heavily use Unity, but there's still a lot using Gnome or KDE or Xfce. Plus, Unity is basically Gnome with a replacement for gnome-shell. And Mint users will most likely be using Cinnamon (which probably makes it a lot more popular than you suggest) or KDE. So those will likely balance out the strong Gnome lead we see on Debian. But as a rough estimate, I think it's safe to say that Gnome 3 is easily in the same ballpark as KDE and Unity. And the Debian results certainly suggest that Gnome 3 is more popular among experienced users than a lot of people like to claim. Which matches what I've been hearing:that many people have been going back to Gnome since 3.8 finally gave us "classic" mode.

(I tried to go through the Ubuntu popcon results, but they don't seem to be as well organized or easy to search, and I gave up in frustration. Feel free to check the numbers yourself. I think you may be surprised at how high in the rankings gnome-shell is, though. Mint doesn't support popcon at this point in time.)

I'd try to factor in Fedora, but Ihave no idea how to estimate what's going on in that part of the world. But I'd say your "over 90%" claim is on pretty shaky ground. (To describe it with more politeness than it probably deserves.)

When looking at the big picture, no, you don't exist. The huge majority (we're talking over 90%) of Linux desktop users are now using Unity, KDE, or XFCE, or MATE, or one of the many other window managers that exist. GNOME 3 and Cinnamon users like you are irrelevant, given your small number.

And your evidence for this amazing claim is...?

The Debian popcon results certainly seem to suggest otherwise:

* gnome-shell: 30% installed, 18% recently used.
* kde-runtime: 19% installed, 11% recently used.
* xfce4-panel: 14% installed, 7.6% recently used.
* lxde-common:5.6% installed, 2.5% recently used.
* mate-panel: 4.6% installed, 2.3% recently used.
* cinnamon: 3.5% installed, 1.6% recently used.
* Unity: not available for Debian.

(When looking at those numbers, you have to take into account the fact that a lot of Debian systems are servers, and don't have X11 installed at all.)

Of course Debian isn't representative of the whole world, but it is generally among the most popular systems, and one that has a disproportionate number of experienced users compared to systems like Ubuntu or Mint. Users who like choice. And they seem to be mostly choosing Gnome 3.

Factoring in Ubuntu and Mint, well, Ubuntu users will heavily use Unity, but there's still a lot using Gnome or KDE or Xfce. Plus, Unity is basically Gnome with a replacement for gnome-shell. And Mint users will most likely be using Cinnamon (which probably makes it a lot more popular than you suggest) or KDE. So those will likely balance out the strong Gnome lead we see on Debian. But as a rough estimate, I think it's safe to say that Gnome 3 is easily in the same ballpark as KDE and Unity. And the Debian results certainly suggest that Gnome 3 is more popular among experienced users than a lot of people like to claim. Which matches what I've been hearing:that many people have been going back to Gnome since 3.8 finally gave us "classic" mode.

(I tried to go through the Ubuntu popcon results, but they don't seem to be as well organized or easy to search, and I gave up in frustration. Feel free to check the numbers yourself. I think you may be surprised at how high in the rankings gnome-shell is, though. Mint doesn't support popcon at this point in time.)

I'd try to factor in Fedora, but Ihave no idea how to estimate what's going on in that part of the world. But I'd say your "over 90%" claim is on pretty shaky ground. (To describe it with more politeness than it probably deserves.)

When looking at the big picture, no, you don't exist. The huge majority (we're talking over 90%) of Linux desktop users are now using Unity, KDE, or XFCE, or MATE, or one of the many other window managers that exist. GNOME 3 and Cinnamon users like you are irrelevant, given your small number.

And your evidence for this amazing claim is...?

The Debian popcon results certainly seem to suggest otherwise:

* gnome-shell: 30% installed, 18% recently used.
* kde-runtime: 19% installed, 11% recently used.
* xfce4-panel: 14% installed, 7.6% recently used.
* lxde-common:5.6% installed, 2.5% recently used.
* mate-panel: 4.6% installed, 2.3% recently used.
* cinnamon: 3.5% installed, 1.6% recently used.
* Unity: not available for Debian.

(When looking at those numbers, you have to take into account the fact that a lot of Debian systems are servers, and don't have X11 installed at all.)

Of course Debian isn't representative of the whole world, but it is generally among the most popular systems, and one that has a disproportionate number of experienced users compared to systems like Ubuntu or Mint. Users who like choice. And they seem to be mostly choosing Gnome 3.

Factoring in Ubuntu and Mint, well, Ubuntu users will heavily use Unity, but there's still a lot using Gnome or KDE or Xfce. Plus, Unity is basically Gnome with a replacement for gnome-shell. And Mint users will most likely be using Cinnamon (which probably makes it a lot more popular than you suggest) or KDE. So those will likely balance out the strong Gnome lead we see on Debian. But as a rough estimate, I think it's safe to say that Gnome 3 is easily in the same ballpark as KDE and Unity. And the Debian results certainly suggest that Gnome 3 is more popular among experienced users than a lot of people like to claim. Which matches what I've been hearing:that many people have been going back to Gnome since 3.8 finally gave us "classic" mode.

(I tried to go through the Ubuntu popcon results, but they don't seem to be as well organized or easy to search, and I gave up in frustration. Feel free to check the numbers yourself. I think you may be surprised at how high in the rankings gnome-shell is, though. Mint doesn't support popcon at this point in time.)

I'd try to factor in Fedora, but Ihave no idea how to estimate what's going on in that part of the world. But I'd say your "over 90%" claim is on pretty shaky ground. (To describe it with more politeness than it probably deserves.)

When looking at the big picture, no, you don't exist. The huge majority (we're talking over 90%) of Linux desktop users are now using Unity, KDE, or XFCE, or MATE, or one of the many other window managers that exist. GNOME 3 and Cinnamon users like you are irrelevant, given your small number.

And your evidence for this amazing claim is...?

The Debian popcon results certainly seem to suggest otherwise:

* gnome-shell: 30% installed, 18% recently used.
* kde-runtime: 19% installed, 11% recently used.
* xfce4-panel: 14% installed, 7.6% recently used.
* lxde-common:5.6% installed, 2.5% recently used.
* mate-panel: 4.6% installed, 2.3% recently used.
* cinnamon: 3.5% installed, 1.6% recently used.
* Unity: not available for Debian.

(When looking at those numbers, you have to take into account the fact that a lot of Debian systems are servers, and don't have X11 installed at all.)

Of course Debian isn't representative of the whole world, but it is generally among the most popular systems, and one that has a disproportionate number of experienced users compared to systems like Ubuntu or Mint. Users who like choice. And they seem to be mostly choosing Gnome 3.

Factoring in Ubuntu and Mint, well, Ubuntu users will heavily use Unity, but there's still a lot using Gnome or KDE or Xfce. Plus, Unity is basically Gnome with a replacement for gnome-shell. And Mint users will most likely be using Cinnamon (which probably makes it a lot more popular than you suggest) or KDE. So those will likely balance out the strong Gnome lead we see on Debian. But as a rough estimate, I think it's safe to say that Gnome 3 is easily in the same ballpark as KDE and Unity. And the Debian results certainly suggest that Gnome 3 is more popular among experienced users than a lot of people like to claim. Which matches what I've been hearing:that many people have been going back to Gnome since 3.8 finally gave us "classic" mode.

(I tried to go through the Ubuntu popcon results, but they don't seem to be as well organized or easy to search, and I gave up in frustration. Feel free to check the numbers yourself. I think you may be surprised at how high in the rankings gnome-shell is, though. Mint doesn't support popcon at this point in time.)

I'd try to factor in Fedora, but Ihave no idea how to estimate what's going on in that part of the world. But I'd say your "over 90%" claim is on pretty shaky ground. (To describe it with more politeness than it probably deserves.)

When looking at the big picture, no, you don't exist. The huge majority (we're talking over 90%) of Linux desktop users are now using Unity, KDE, or XFCE, or MATE, or one of the many other window managers that exist. GNOME 3 and Cinnamon users like you are irrelevant, given your small number.

And your evidence for this amazing claim is...?

The Debian popcon results certainly seem to suggest otherwise:

* gnome-shell: 30% installed, 18% recently used.
* kde-runtime: 19% installed, 11% recently used.
* xfce4-panel: 14% installed, 7.6% recently used.
* lxde-common:5.6% installed, 2.5% recently used.
* mate-panel: 4.6% installed, 2.3% recently used.
* cinnamon: 3.5% installed, 1.6% recently used.
* Unity: not available for Debian.

(When looking at those numbers, you have to take into account the fact that a lot of Debian systems are servers, and don't have X11 installed at all.)

Of course Debian isn't representative of the whole world, but it is generally among the most popular systems, and one that has a disproportionate number of experienced users compared to systems like Ubuntu or Mint. Users who like choice. And they seem to be mostly choosing Gnome 3.

Factoring in Ubuntu and Mint, well, Ubuntu users will heavily use Unity, but there's still a lot using Gnome or KDE or Xfce. Plus, Unity is basically Gnome with a replacement for gnome-shell. And Mint users will most likely be using Cinnamon (which probably makes it a lot more popular than you suggest) or KDE. So those will likely balance out the strong Gnome lead we see on Debian. But as a rough estimate, I think it's safe to say that Gnome 3 is easily in the same ballpark as KDE and Unity. And the Debian results certainly suggest that Gnome 3 is more popular among experienced users than a lot of people like to claim. Which matches what I've been hearing:that many people have been going back to Gnome since 3.8 finally gave us "classic" mode.

(I tried to go through the Ubuntu popcon results, but they don't seem to be as well organized or easy to search, and I gave up in frustration. Feel free to check the numbers yourself. I think you may be surprised at how high in the rankings gnome-shell is, though. Mint doesn't support popcon at this point in time.)

I'd try to factor in Fedora, but Ihave no idea how to estimate what's going on in that part of the world. But I'd say your "over 90%" claim is on pretty shaky ground. (To describe it with more politeness than it probably deserves.)

I know it's only micro benchmarks, but according to this: http://benchmarksgame.alioth.d... C++ run through GCC 4.9.2 maintains a roughly 3x speed lead over Java JDK 1.8.0_45b14 in three benchmarks, a 2x speed lead in another three, a lead in another three, and a loss in two. That speaks very well for the JVM, really. There are a huge number of applications where that gap is acceptable.

But it also speaks to your point that JIT compilation still doesn't bring Java to the speed of well-written, optimized native code. There are plenty of other applications where a 2x or 3x speed advantage for C++ or C is critical.

Two-in-one or classic laptop?

Which 2-in-1s work well with Linux? I've read horror stories about Wi-Fi and suspend not working on 10 inch 2-in-1s like the ASUS Transformer Book and the Acer Aspire Switch. Debian says screen backlight control on the Transformer Book T100TA is "Unsupported (No Driver)", suspend is "Error (Couldn't get it working)", and Wi-Fi is "Only works with a non-free driver".

Spot on.
Microsoft could prove the value of the programme if it implemented something like the the Reproducible Builds project by Debian: https://wiki.debian.org/Reprod...
'Course, that would probably be an openness too far for them...

Then which distro should I use instead of Xubuntu on a Transformer Book? Google asus transformer book linux suspend brought this disappointing result: "suspend not working at all" and "Reboot doesn't work either, seems like acpi is broken." Likewise Debian has "Sleep / Suspend: Error (Couldn't get it working)".

Those desiring the change are the ones that need to explain why the change is needed/desirable in the first place.

They have, many times and in different places. If you didn't know that, maybe you should do some research.

I said that the arguments typically presented were weak and unreasonable.

So you do know that arguments and rationale have been made. Ok, how about a substantive counterargument then. Preferably one that actually addresses the arguments given and doesn't just dismiss them as "weak and unreasonable."

The ridiculously common command line that you wrote above fails on many/most distros that have chosen systemd as a default. These systems have no syslog at all.

Every distro that I know of (Red Hat, CentOS, Debian, Ubuntu, Arch) currently installs syslog alongside journald. If you don't have syslog installed, install it, and take it up with your distro for not including it. What your distro decides and decides not to bundle is not the fault of systemd.

Installing syslog on such a system doesn't log systems messages unless you reroute all of them away form systemd/journalctl.

Newsflash: you cannot have two logging daemons listening on the same socket and receiving the same system calls. If you want two logging daemons, one will need to forward that information to the other. JournalD does this, syslog does not, hence the current arrangement where journald forwards logging information to syslog.

But, do carry on insinuating that my log usage or viewing habits are inferior or inadequate because they use the preferred methods of the last 20+ years, rather than your preferred and totally new method. While we're at it, how about the fact that the log file itself is now formatted differently and is binary encoded rather than text. No, that doesn't break anything, 'except old people stuff'.

Wow, defensive much? Whether or not they are inferior or inadequate depends on what you are doing. They are for some people, and journalctl is the solution. If you don't want to use it, that's your choice. Do continue using your method of 20+ years, but you will be missing out on the advantages that journald provides.

As for dependencies, log dependencies are broken, despite your childish refrain of veiled insults. Startup scripts are broken. and the list of broken projects/packages/scripts goes on and on.

If there is a new init system, then old init scripts will be have to rewritten to use it. There is a compatibility method to ease the migration, but a migration will still be necessary eventually. I'm not sure why this is so shocking to you. Your argument basically boils down to "systemd is bad because it isn't sysvinit." If you don't see why that is a ridiculous argument, I don't know what else to say.

These facts aside, you're still arguing with insults.

I am not doing that at all. I am explaining to you how systemd works. You are the one taking it as an insult.

You're not presenting arguments that demonstrate any actual value of the new system/way.

Why do I need to present the arguments in favor of systemd, again, when they have already been made repeatedly elsewhere? At any rate, systemd advocacy is not the purpose of my reply. I am just explaining to you how it works and dispelling the myths that you are perpetuating.

All you've said, like I claimed in the GP, is that my 'unwillingness to accept the new way is because I'm inadequate in my use of Linux and that real users like yourself need all this old shit gone because it's old'.

Nowhere did I say anything like that.

I still say that this is not a valid or logical reason.

It's a good thing that is not one of the reasons then. There is a pretty good summary here (since you insist),
https://wiki.debian.org/Debate...

I don't think so. I've written about this before. This link is especially informative.

There's a detailed discussion of it available.

Debian does releases. They also provide a rolling release, but that isn't the only option.

testing and unstable are rolling releases. stable is a fixed release, but it's too old for most people to use. So if you want to have a halfway recent Debian with fixed packet versions, you have to roll your own or use one of the ones that other people (like Ubuntu) already provide.

They also provide security updates for their releases, so normally "patching in" security updates is done using apt-get.

I know, but if you're running your own fixed-release Debian, you'd have to build those packages yourself.

Debian does releases. They also provide a rolling release, but that isn't the only option.

testing and unstable are rolling releases. stable is a fixed release, but it's too old for most people to use. So if you want to have a halfway recent Debian with fixed packet versions, you have to roll your own or use one of the ones that other people (like Ubuntu) already provide.

They also provide security updates for their releases, so normally "patching in" security updates is done using apt-get.

I know, but if you're running your own fixed-release Debian, you'd have to build those packages yourself.

The only problem with Ubuntu versus some other offerings like Red Hat is that the support time of the LTS version of Ubuntu is pretty short (only 5 years). It really depends on your project whether this is good enough for your situation. Debian doesn't even have such a LTS version. You only have to guess when Debian stops supporting their OS.

Debian does have LTS support [1] which means that stable releases are supported for (at least) 5 years. You also don't have to 'guess' anything - EOL dates are also provided at [1] (and in a few other places).

[1] https://wiki.debian.org/LTS

Debian does releases. They also provide a rolling release, but that isn't the only option.

They also provide security updates for their releases, so normally "patching in" security updates is done using apt-get.

Debian does releases. They also provide a rolling release, but that isn't the only option.

They also provide security updates for their releases, so normally "patching in" security updates is done using apt-get.

I work in this field, and outside of the commercial pharma companies, the general rule is that all the data goes public and that all the code written is open source. All the big publicly funded agencies, and certainly all the research councils here in the UK, follow this principle. Admittedly some people do sit on the data a bit longer than they should before releasing it, but in principle it all goes public and freely available.

Want to find open, public data in genomic science, or contribute to an open database? - fill your boots: http://www.oxfordjournals.org/...
Want to find new open-source algorithms for genome analysis? There are so many it's hard to keep up - http://blends.debian.org/med/t...

In the EU, there is so much data in public databases they had to start a pan-European effort called ELIXIR just to try and work out how they were going to handle all the data curation work.

So, not to take anything away from this fine project, the idea that it's special because it's open source or because scientists are collaborating widely is just plain silly.

TIM