Slashdot Mirror
Debian Forked Over Systemd
jaromil writes: The so called "Veteran Unix Admin" collective has announced that the fork of Debian will proceed as a result of the recent systemd controversy. The reasons put forward are not just technical; included is a letter of endorsement by Debian Developer Roger Leigh mentioning that "people rely on Debian for their jobs and businesses, their research and their hobbies. It's not a playground for such radical experimentation." The fork is called "Devuan," pronounced "DevOne." The official website has more information.
He's at school right now, but wants to be a rapper.
I thought this was (or: started as) a joke?
Good luck on maintaining init scripts for every single project that already (and those that surely will) move to systemd!
But that website is atrocious suck. Top AND bottom panes which don't move and serve no purpose other than to obscure the window? What the hell is this shit?
I wonder if they will leverage the systemd shim 'uselessd' ? It has a less-than-great name, though looks well written and regularly updated.
https://bitbucket.org/bcsd/uselessd/raw/linux-devel/NEWS
Never let sysadmins name anything. They couldn't find one single marketing / PR person to test that name?
...a fork of Debian,
Such a thing is unheard of in Debian's 20-odd year history.
I wonder what the impact of this fork will be on Debian-proper.
Devuan will do its best to stay minimal and abide to the UNIX philosophy of "doing one thing and doing it well"
I don't need a kitchen sink in my computer, or my computer in the kitchen sink. It's not like chocolate and peanut butter. I wish them the best.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
GCC was forked successfully to egcs
XFree86 was forked successfully to xorg
FreeBSD was forked successfully to netbsd and dragondflybsd
OpenOffice was forked successfully to libreoffice
Now it's the debian's turn to be forked. Good luck to everyone.
I will stick with systemd version, which works fast and provides an actually exiting startup manager.
Hey, just wanted to let you know that the lyric you quoted is incorrect.
Thank you for being a friend
Traveled down the road and back again
Your heart is true, you're a pal and an in flagrante.
And if you threw a party
Invited everyone you knew
You would see the biggest gift would be from me
And the card attached would say, thank you for being a friend.
I have corrected the lyric above. It's a sub rosa reference to the steamy lesbian three-way relationship in this show. Ever wonder what "the biggest gift" is that they reference in the song? Use your imagination.
Hell, even the show title is a reference to their off-screen kinky sex play.
To be honest this new Debian seems Juan-derful. They've clearly made this decision based on a lot of technical experience, based on their webpage being of the highest quality. I look forward to continuing to write my startup scripts in Dash!
But maybe it'll remove the obstructionist anti-systemd whiners for a while, so Debian can get on with things that matter.
Climate Progress - Hell and High Water
They should fork Ubuntu instead. Packages are more current
Then just call it DevOne and be done with it. Stop with the words play and the phonetic cuteness, not everyone speaks english and spanish. If I read "Devuan" I'm going to pronounce "Dév-u-en" (french).
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
No mention of "Devuan" here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systemd
I was just thinking that what's holding back the Linux community is the lack of yet another distro.
2015 will surely be the year of the Linux Desktop now!
Still no mention of Devuan here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systemd
They should create a separate wikipedia page for Devuan.
The sarcasm on this site is usually a bit more obvious. Needless to say...or maybe not...Debian is the most forked linux distribution on the planet. Its the prison b!tch of distros ;-)
Tell that to LibreOffice.
Verizon had to deal with this by spending a gazillion dollars on TV advertising that they hadn't anticipated coming out of the gate. Lots and lots of people saw the name and equated it with words like "very" or "verify" so they were pronouncing it VAIR-uh-zonn instead of how the marketdroids wanted it pronounced. Dumb ass name cost them a lot of $$ in "consumer re-education" efforts.
Far more important than removing systemd
Debian will probably continue on its way of becoming a desktop user distro. I do know a lot of sysadmins that are now eager to switch to the first good systemd-free Debian fork.
It'll be called DevOne and the maintenance will be straight forward. Everything will be the same as Devuan except for the name!
Ahh, the usual misrepresentation of why we oppose systemd that always shows up. Calling us haters while trying to reframe the discussion away from the real issues isn't convincing - it just adds evidence that systemd gains position by propagand and politics instead of design and implementation quality. No, you are not going to scare us away form linux. Some may retreat to FreeBSD, which is fine (it's a good OS). The rest of us are going to stay with linux, even if it large parts of linux leave and become part of the systemd monoculture. We've been here before, after all, over a decade ago.
The varied technical issues with systemd are bad enough, but they have already been discussed, and are a central reason why the sysadmins ae forking Debian. Many systemd advocates try and steer discussions back to these technical issues - while denying that systemd doesn't actually work for everybody - to avoides talking about the fundamental design problems and philosophical changes that systemd forces on Linux. While it is currently popular to "move fast and break things", those of us with more experience understand the value in not breaking everything. None of this means that those that are better served by systemd shoudl stop using it! We're only angry about the attemts to force a monoculture by breaking compatability for political reasons, when there as no technical need. You know, like Microsoft does with their "not invented here" attitude.
Still, those are philosophical issues about the software itself. That is not the primary problem some of us have with systemd, which is not about technical problems, but is instead an attack on our prefered method of licencing. The systemd takeover is an attempt to separate Linux and many userspace tools from the GPL, so that software can be used under the LGPL terms instead.
What is the big difference between GPL and LGPL? Linkage. Linking to a GPL library requires you to follow certain requirements if you link against it, while the LGPL specifically allows taht usage. (k)dbus provides the workaround, by replacing what would be a normal function call into a library with a "IPC". It's slower, but so what, computers are way faster than needed. In the end, while you can still choose to release your code as GPL, if you have to use an IPC mechanism to do anything useful the license requirements that will actually apply ends up being being more like the LGPL. For a better explanation, see this post by stevel in the Gentoo forums.
Well, if I wanted to release under the LGPL, I would. What I'm not going to do is undermine my choice of license just because a bunch of embedded developers (and others) want to use what were traditionally GPL projects without having to be bound by the copyleft requirements. If this was proprietary software, you would call that kind of behavior "stealing" or "piracy".
So don't bother with claims about "faster desktops" or "easier programming". When your solution also bundles a forced monoculture ("unifying the difference betwen distributions") and contains a loophole around the licence some of us chose it is simply not an option for those of us that place "freedom" as the most important feature. /how much does JTRIG (or their equivalent) pay for these propaganda attempts, anyway? //It's a waste of money regardless, given how transparent these comments are ///some of this post is reused from a post I made on HN
Ce n'est pas une signature automatique.
Bug RESOLVED.
Status: WONTFIX - Working as Designed
Damn straight! There should only be one Linux distribution - everything else is breaking Linux!
In open-source, forking is as healthy as democracy, perhaps moreso.
For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
Diversity is a good thing. I understand that, with increasing use of Linux as a desktop OS by people who don't run servers, systemd makes a lot of sense for some people.
I am the primary admin on servers in three different states. The benefits of using init for remote admin outweigh the simplicity and user-friendliness of systemd on my laptop.
I switched from Mandrake to Debian almost fifteen years ago when I first started doing heavy remote admin, I'll make a change again now, and the world will keep on spinning. Having both approaches is a good thing.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
It's worse. Pottering is paid by Microsoft to destroy the Linux community. Every. Single. Thing. he touches is crap, mostly pointless, controversial, and breaks everything. I have no idea why people don't see this.
LibreOffice is developed by (most of) the original OpenOffice team. They resigned enmasse from Oracle once it was clear that Oracle didn't want to continue putting money into the project.
.: Semper Absurda
Just finished installing a FreeBSD system after 15 years. Python, Apache, mod_wsgi, KDE and Firefox are good to go (though Apache is with worker rather than prefork).
Hope Devuan works out, will be watching/trying it closely. Otherwise jessie-without-systemd might be my last Debian system.
Have been using Unix/Linux for 30 years, Debian for 10. Have worked to convert a few hundred servers at my company from Fedora/RH to Debian. Sad way to go.
(Captcha: forking!!)
“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.” --Margaret Thatcher
“The problem with open source is that you eventually run out of other people's work.”--Me
Umm, no.
While you may run out of money, you will never run out of the ability to make a copy of software.
Because of that, open source software may be the only instance where communism actually makes sense and really works.
Where is the slashot "like" button? I feel this is the case where it's needed, and also maybe a "don't like" ... :)
This isn't a "downstream branch" like Ubuntu, which strengthens the community by sending patches upstream
That's a groundless assertion - there is no reason (technical or political) that Devuan wouldn't send patches upstream for general packages.
Those people who created this fork are a bunch of malcontents that are whining because they didn't get their way.
So according to you, people should devote their time and effort for free to software they don't like, and if they don't they're "whiny malcontents." One of the key aspects of FOSS is the freedom to run and work on the software that you like and support. Once you understand that, you can stop whining about decisions you disagree with and get to work on something useful. In fact, that's the whole idea behind this fork.
This is breaking up of a strong community, and it's now going to be inherently weaker.
More groundless FUD. Do you think whining about this is helping FOSS or Debian?
.: Semper Absurda
'Nuff said.
My main assertion is that many forks are done with good intentions. This new fork, on the other hand, is not necessarily based on the best motivations.
Why don't you just follow the links in the post?
"Devuan is spelled in Italian and it is pronounced just like "DevOne" in English." http://devuan.org/
And to me it sounds great.
I used to be a sys admin, but that was years ago and currently I only use Linux on the desktop. I don't suppose that someone could explain to me (or just give me a link to an explanation): what is systemd exactly, what does it change, and why do people both love and hate it so much?
I've seen enough of these stories now to kind of get the feeling that it's mostly admins who hate this, and they mostly hate it because it's change and it screws up their configs. Is that right? Is there any other reason to hate it? I have no idea what the motivation is on the other side.
I don't suppose someone has a good article or explanation about why the entire systemd thing is a hot issue in the first place?
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
Soon I'll announce the project. Systemd is simply a bullet in the head.
I've expected some OpenBSD like webpage from such a collective as Veteran Unix Admins, not this purple-orange atrocity. DevOne? Is that for Devs or for Sysadmins? And GitHub as primary development platform? Also don't forget to talk about correctness and The Old Ways(TM) and ask for donations on the same page. Deranged Unix Admins would have been a better fit...
Anyway, putting aside my opinion, let me wish you good luck.
And my point is that ascribing to these developers a desire to maliciously weaken Debian is groundless and inflammatory.
The motivation is to have a Linux distribution which has 1) stability, 2) easy package management and 3) doesn't require systemd. Debian is a great place to start for (1) and (2), while having (3) means that the distro maintains compatibility with critical code on which many jobs depend, maintains stability while systemd is in flux and will appeal to users/admins who disagree with some of the key design decisions made in systemd. Seems legit to me.
Personally, I've been waiting for a fork like this, because I use Debian but don't like binary loggers or init systems with embedded QR encoders. I do like the approach taken by uselessd, which is to adopt the best parts about systemd while leaving out the questionable components (binary logging, embedded web server, etc.) and keeping a good separation of concerns between init and the rest of the system. On the other hand, I will be disappointed if Devuan requires SysV init the way other distros are requiring systemd. The worst part of the whole systemd debacle is all the pointless acrimony, but the second worst part might be the false dichotomies drawn between SysV and systemd as the "one old, bad way" and the "one new, good way." There's just a lot more to it than that - and it looks like this fork is going to be the only way to use Debian with SysV, systemd, uselessd, upstart or whatever gives you what you need from an init system.
.: Semper Absurda
Serious question: where is Stallman and the FSF on this? Seems like they'd be concerned, based on your post.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
This fork is done with the intention of removing a massive point of instability in what has always been the most stable Linux distro. If you don't think that's a good intention, I really have to question yours. Well, after reading some of your other posts, no I don't; it's actually pretty clear what they are.
Well, FOSS is not a democracy. These people have decided they don't like the situation and are working with it. That, surely, is part of the point of FOSS.
If you continue your argument logically, you could argue that working on systemd, clang/lvmm, libav, Gnome, x.org, eglibc, Linux and Unix was breaking a strong community and making it inherently weaker. (Some of these actually made the alternatives stronger. I can't see that happening with sysvinit, though)
This isn't a "downstream branch" like Ubuntu, which strengthens the community by sending patches upstream. This is breaking up of a strong community, and it's now going to be inherently weaker.
Have you ever read the Canonical CLA?
Interesting. I have to say I am also worried about software freedom, but not so much because of licensing.
I am worried because loosly coupled systems based on well defined interfaces are replaced by deeply integrated systems. This means that you cannot easily replace one part you do not like with another anymore. This is not only bad engineering, it also limits your freedom in a very real sense. This is the real problem with systemd - and not only with systemd
From a Linux Journal article by Ian Murdock in 1994:
As the Debian developers create their pieces, they follow strict guidelines for constructing and maintaining these pieces, called packages. Because these guidelines are followed, each package can be dropped into the system independently without damaging or interfering with programs from other packages. By working with a set of consistent rules and with identical tools, the volunteers can and do create a truly modular system.
Nuff said.
This page accidentally left blank
but it's just not working.
Actually, floppies never were dependable nor durable. If you're not using PXE booting to install Linux, well, you're living in the past (and flash drives if you can't PXE boot for some reason).
I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
Democracy happened. Democracy is good.
There are examples in history of democracy going awfuly wrong.
This is breaking up of a strong community, and it's now going to be inherently weaker.
Are you suggesting that people working on an FOSS project should be forced to continue even after said project has taken a direction they are in moral disagreement with ?
First of all - thanks for an interesting comment. Your insight on licensing issues regarding use of systemd never occured to me.
Regarding your comment - I cant validate all your claims right now but I trust they are valid - in Your opinion why there is NO mention about licensing on the new fork site? The site is TL;DR to me as it is in my opinion yet another meaningless fork of Debian but I tried to search the site for terms like "license", "gpl" and there are exactly zero occurances of such terms. It seems to me as the authors of the fork didn't find your arguments about licensing as interesting to mention it.
So how exactly this fork is better for your goals?
If I was in situation in which licensing was critical to me I would use Gentoo since as far as I know it is only decent and recent distro that actually lets you choose init system to your liking.
Claiming the motivation of an IPC bus is the subversion of software freedom is ridiculous. IPC has existed in Linux since the dawn of time and so has subverting licensing restrictions been possible. Especially in embedded systems where the vendor puts the whole stack together and doesn't really need what dbus provides - service discovery. The one component that would give credence to your absurd delusion - an automatic interface generator for arbitrary libraries - is actually missing from dbus. And such a thing could be just as well be written to work over any IPC, HTTP, JSON-RPC or what have you, nobody seems to be boycotting those.
Decoupling functionality into separate processes can increase maintainability, security and stability.
Your trolling is bad and you should feel bad, if you want to attack someone for subverting software freedom, find a perp that's actually guilty.
Well, I'm a current Debian user, and I switched from testing to stable because of problems with systemd. OTOH, there's a good reason that it's called testing.
Still, while I don't hate systemd, I also don't trust it. My current intention is to remain on stable while things shake themselves out, and then decide what to do. And the Devuan timeline doesn't show it being available even as a "testing" distribution until next spring. (I gather the current version is sort of a compromise between prototype and unstable[sid], or even experimental.)
By the time I need to decide, I expect I'll know how things are going to shake out. But I expect that I'll be keeping an eye on Devuan, and a few others. And perhaps systemd won't be as bad as I expect. Still, any init system that marks problems with its logging system as "won't fix" is dubious. That the main logging system is binary just makes things much worse. So does expansions like having the "init system" include things like terminal manager, etc. It even makes me tempted to go back to Etch (yah, that's a rediculuous thing to suggest, as the current stable works fine without systemd).
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
That seems backwards. Based on this claim, systemd reduces the coupling between Linux and GNU tools, and allows each part to be replaced more easily.
> On the one hand, forking is what drives Free Software. It allows us to innovate,
> adapt software to new needs, etc. Without it, the FOSS community would not be
> as strong as it is.
Of course the ability of forking is great. I would compare it to a relationship - if at some point you realize that your goals or whatever are not in sync then you fork it is not easy comes with attached looses to both sides but it is but doable. And an obvious way to go if you can't go together.
BUT this is not a fork in my opinion. A fork it will be if we can get anything usable from it like a working distro in this case. But now it is just an other act of DRAMA. Like in relationship - you know I am forking right now! look this is my fork website! look i WILL fork. Geeesh than do fork and get over it.
These guys are behaving like overly attached boy/girl friend who in fact DOES NOT want to fork but uses threats that she/he will fork to force something on the other side.
I know it is simplification but really right now from my point of view it just looks like emotional drama.
As for techical merits in my own opinion. I dont care. I am not by any means a white bearded system admin. I use Linux profesionally and I like it. I really haven't noticed the whole systemd drama until it popped out in media. Professinaly I use RHEL and CentOS because I can run software on it for my employer and it is OK. We use Oracle, SAP, Zimbra and other products so for me it makes no real difference as what init system is used as far as it works.
In my personal systems I've used RH from like 5.0 release and I liked it. I used it till it separated into RHEL and Fedora - then I've used Fedora but around release 14 or some it becamed very annoying (lots of problems with distro upgrade, hardware etc.). Then I've started to evaluate other distros. Also got a RaspberryPi and tried Pidora on that. More annoyng than ever. Then I've tried Arch Linux and I got hooked imediately - works well on my home systems (server, workstation, laptop) and also on RaspberryPi. And it uses systemd in more fashinable way than Fedora (but things may have gone better - I've not touched it since 14). So I don't really get this systemd "controversy".
The name sounds so much like a joke that maybe someone is intentionally trying to sow more discord in the community. Or Maybe English isn't their native language and they don't know how bad it looks in English? It might look less ridiculous in Spanish. In either case, many people won't take something that is spelled "Devuan" seriously, and there will be a lot of arguing.
Developers were like "Systemd?! Fork u Debian!" /gloat
You obviously have no idea why systemd isn't portable. Its whole point of existence is process management using cgroups. Shame on the kernel devs for not writing cgroups into every OS's kernel! Oh wait, that's retarded. And guess what else you can't run on Mac OSX or Windows? Your SysV init scripts. Hell, those aren't usually portable between distributions; systemd is more compatible. You're also wrong about GNOME; their continued policy is to keep the loosest possible dependency on systemd, and that only because they need the features of logind. Write a replacement, and they will use it.
Whenever other kernels support compatible features you can argue about portability. It sounds like you have some code you need to get writing.
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
The only differences that anyone outside of device driver writers will (or at least, should) ever see in 10, 100, and 1000 base-t ethernet is the leaps in speed between versions. Anyone who walked into the office and found their 100m connection replaced with gigabit would be pleased.
Compare this to the first time I ran into systemd, which was... not a pleasing surprise. At all.
uselessd is a great name. What does uselessd do? Very little, which is the point.
Devuan is a stupid name. What does Devuan do? Rob people and get shot by the cops.
The Lead Dev (Jsomething) has maintained a distro before.
He's an Italian guy with an afro.
His old distro was one of the only that supported wireless way back when.
So I'd say they have some talent already that can pull it off.
Sounds like they're starting small, join and they can go bigger.
If gnome components depend specifically on systemd this seems to imply that there are no well-defined interfaces and the code is coupled, this has nothing to do with linking vs RPC over dbus.
That isn't caused by systemd, that is caused by gnome sucking. Something that has been getting worse every year since Gtk3. Maybe they were lazy? It is like a voodoo spell, "gnome gnome gnome dependency!!!!" with no specific technical analysis of a problem.
OK, let me have a go at this. Please excuse me for redundantly rewording the whole thing. I believe the particular wording will help convey my personal impression and point of view better, and will allow the reader to detect any errors in my thinking and correct me better.
Traditionally, Linux and most of its userspace is GPL. Some people like that. You could say it was absolutely vital in emergence of Linux as a viable system.
This wasn't perfect for business, so successively, license solutions which allowed system libraries to be used by commercial applications were found, and these libraries were licensed accordingly. Like GPL with exceptions, and then LGPL.
As number of commercial interests grew, so did the number of components licensed under LGPL. There have also been efforts to reduce binary coupling between systems, by using IPC/RPC protocols instead of calling foreign code directly. This was made to mitigate a particular kind dependency hell where one program at any particular version depends on the source of another program or component at some particular version. This makes updates and crossgrades easier, and allows software to evolve with less dependence on the underlying system. This benefits commercial software more than it benefits open-source software, though i believe it is a technical merit at least as much as it is a political one.
So far so good, or so bad, depending on your camp and bias.
And yet all of this is a red herring. Once something is LGPLed or GPLed, nobody can ever take it away from you, your freedom to use and modify this software. If you want to release your software as GPL, what prevents you from doing so?
Nothing technically, but the following limits its usefulness. RPC allows proprietary software to leverage the functionality of your GPL software, which might go against your intent, as RPC becomes the de facto interface of increasing number of components...
But have you considered that RPC has been used by proprietary software for a long time? Or even applications signed with GPL incompatible open source license like Apache. They just bundle their own RPC host, written in a GPL compatible license.
Considering this workaround, it pays to reconsider whether GPL is adequate towards heavily componentized (as opposed to mostly-monolithic) software in the first place. It might be that the whole linkage wording is a nonsensical idea, because it takes a completely arbitrary and very narrow view of the software composition and component reuse.
Yet finally, why would you sacrifice a technical merit just to attempt, in vain, to satisfy your political one?
It isn't showing up yet, but I am putting my money where my mouth is. I encourage anyone that used to donate to Debhat, change over to Devuan.
Debian devs are feminists and SJWs, they like change for the sake of change and to defeat "the man". They care nothing for "white male tears" even though most of them are that.
Debian excludes game due to author's views on women.
A DFSG complaint opensource casino video game was
recently posted to the debian bug tracker as a request
for packaging, as is the standard method for pursuing
such things in debian.
The bug was quickly closed, tagged as "won't fix"
The reason given by one of the debian developers
alluded to the author's opinion on women:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bi...
The piece of software in question is licensed
under the GPL and is one of the only of it's
kind for linux (ascii-art console slot machine software)
Debian packages many ascii-art / text console
video games of similar quality.
Is professing inclusive social views now a hard requirement
for being allowed to contribute to free software projects?
#gamergate #geekfeminism
Oh, I didn't mean to imply that anyone was being malicious. Unwise, perhaps.
Eg, many people claim it's monolithic. In fact, it's made of ~100 daemons and applications and the init process isn't that big. Much much smaller than the Linux kernel itself, which a big monolithic kernel.
Whether something is monolithic is not about the number of separate processes, but rather about how tightly coupled they are.
RPC allows proprietary software to leverage the functionality of your GPL software, which might go against your intent, as RPC becomes the de facto interface of increasing number of components...
Honestly, I don't buy into the whole non-GPL can't link GPL argument in the first place.
Suppose I were to tell you to grab your copy of the 3rd paperback printing of Game of Thrones and look at the second sentence on page 320. Does posting that sentence make this post a violation of GRRM's copyright? Of course not - I didn't copy anything in his book - simply mentioning that it exists and that it contains a page 320 in no way makes this post a derivative work.
Well, when you link a binary to a shared object, all you do is write a bunch of cross references saying that this function call should be replaced with an address associated with this symbol. Then a linker will replace those references when your code is loaded. None of this involves copying anything. Assuming the shared object is in RAM already being used by something else, your OS isn't even copying the GPL code at all when this happens, but even if a copy were made it is an unmodified copy of the shared object which isn't being redistributed - ie it is permitted by the GPL.
Sure, everybody says that you can't link non-GPL code to GPL code, but I am not convinced that a court is certain to uphold this. I could see issues if you try to bundle GPL and non-GPL software into a single larger work, but if you distribute the non-GPL stuff without the GPL content that problem goes away.
Well, why fork? Why not team up with Slackware?
I hate both SystemD AND Init. Can I have something else? I thought Linsux was about chOOOOIIIIIce!!11!
bonus: catcha: "reform"
This was inevitable. Some years ago Debian welcomed do-nothing women into the fold (Debian-women)
They then kicked out any anti-feminist man from Debian (example: Ted Walther). Today any new
debian developer is vetted by the debian-women.
Techis love feminists. They love social justice warriors. They love the world they live in
where they are eternally denied power, respect, so on and so forth. They enjoy being
cattle prodded towards "Strong" women, and denied young girls.
They love this change that has occured in the world: it becoming a woman's world, rather than a man's.
They love that they would be imprisoned if they ever tried to marry a young girl
(Allowed in the Old Testament: Deuteronomy 22 28-29, hebrew).
They love to be hearded and forced. That is the kind of men they are.
And thus, is it any wonder, that They love the SystemD.
Apparently this has been encouraged by systemd developesr: https://mail.gnome.org/archive...
What I'm not going to do is undermine my choice of license just because a bunch of embedded developers (and others) want to use what were traditionally GPL projects without having to be bound by the copyleft requirements. If this was proprietary software, you would call that kind of behavior "stealing" or "piracy".
So don't bother with claims about "faster desktops" or "easier programming". When your solution also bundles a forced monoculture ("unifying the difference betwen distributions") and contains a loophole around the licence some of us chose it is simply not an option for those of us that place "freedom" as the most important feature.
I like the GPL, as a voluntary choice. You sound like the U.S. crying that Russia is "circumventing" "freedom" by choosing to remain independent.
Who are you to tell people WHO FOLLOW THE LICENSE what to do? They may be pissing all over the spirit, sure. The GPL itself is a "loophole" arguably a necessary and beneficial one, a worthwhile counterbalance.
No license or law can grant anyone freedom. That is a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of government. Governments and laws can only restrict freedom. In the case of GPL, what you give up is deemed a "worthwhile trade" and the net benefit is supposedly greater than not making that trade.
I think that is a very valid point you bring up, although I disagree completely with "GPL is the solution" and that you have any right to tell people WHO ARE OBEYING THE LICENSE what to do. The spirit they are ignoring, intentionally or not, I will not disagree. But I find it unlikely any court will care much for "spirit" if the letter is clearly being followed, unless they are intentional and willful attempts to violate the spirit and cause harm.
Thank you for the post, it is good to know some people have legitimate concerns.
Proprietary software would be wrong to call it "piracy" or "stealing" since technically people are following the license, but yes most of them would stoop that low. Please do not denigrate worthwhile causes by stooping down to their level.
It is enough to say "this brings a potential loophole (which will inevitably be taken advantage of)" without succumbing to the scare tactics that others use. It is a big enough and real enough danger IMO.
Noone really cares what license you "chose." Vote with your dollars / pesos / francs, support those whose ideas you like.
Crying that "someone followed the rules, but not how I thought they would" is a waste of time. Doesn't matter if you are 100% right or not. They are not "leeching" at all if they are following the license.
You thought you could legislate "spirit" and "morality" ? Cue the sound of a thousand priests throughout time, shaking their head.
This is the inevitable result when you attempt to do so. Nothing surprising, no "loophole" INEVITABLE. Nothing to get upset about, it was inevitable.
Many corporations only use GPL software so they can do such things. No need to pick on "embedded" developers, many web shops do the same exact thing. Write a PHP or Rails or app, and it runs on a GPL software stack, calls "down" to a trillion GPL components, but the code itself is safely proprietary and never licensed to the outside world under any circumstance whatsoever.
No, that does not make it "right" but I don't see why you pick on "embedded" developers specifically. The "leeching" is much deeper than that, much more comprehensive. Indeed, many companies use GPL software without contributing ANYTHING back, not even bug reports, not even a $100 yearly donation, absolutely nothing.
The only "free" code is that which you wrote yourself and can license however you wish. Even public domain code, that you can grab and do anything you want with, is not "free" since you cannot prevent someone from putting it under more restrictive terms.
I do not disagree with you, you have a valid point, but the other side is likely to say you are not about "freedom" at all, a
I hope they also bring back floppy installs
They never should've gone away. Maybe a virtual machine it is easier to emulate.
The install should be *generic* if it is hard-coded for ANY particular installation method, that is a lousy obsolete choice.
No, that does not mean "support floppies forever" that means simply "why drop something that works."
You know what you get FOR FREE once you support floppies? Multiple archives, installation media split across multiple disks.
That is useful for much more than just floppies.
You need some mechanism to split installer files down to a particular medium size. That, too, is useful for more than just floppy installs.
By supporting floppies, you gain more than just that. A properly-designed installer, will benefit from floppy support in more ways than just supporting that particular medium.
Heck, if floppies are unreliable, that means you should have good checksum / hash / etc. verification of installation files. All installs, from whatever source media format, benefit from that support.
Your sarcasm is just a sign that you are shortsighted, and do not know proper design.
A web browser should not care if it goes over token ring, or ethernet, or a parallel cable, or a serial cable, or a wireless NIC, or a radio link. Again, your retardation is showing.
Token ring is useful for testing and verifying proper operation EVEN IF IT NEVER GETS DEPLOYED. It is good for verifying code that sits atop of that layer of networking is robust and properly implemented EVEN IF THAT CODE NEVER HAS TO RUN ON A TOKEN RING NETWORK.
It is actually LESS WORK to maintain a diverse testbed in the long run (within reason) because you find MORE BUGS FASTER testing on a diverse set of conditions, than if your code only runs "under ideal scenarios" and then when it hits some customer site that is not 100% the same as yours, does not behave properly.
You know nothing about design or QA. Just another micromanager, looking to "cut costs."
Hell, floppies and token ring can be SIMULATED we have VIRTUAL MACHINES nowadays. Where have you been the last 60 years?
Distributions should rarely CARE AT ALL what medium you use to install. More mechanisms AT THE BEGINNING may introduce more bugs and be more work, but in the long run is actually less work, you get a more robust system, and you have a much better testbed. This means new features get tested much more thoroughly than only on your "ideal hardware" that not everyone happens to have.
Are you retarded, or what? Just like to break things, and move on, and leave everyone else to pick up the pieces? You made your million, fuck everyone else I guess?
Seriously, you think emulating a floppy drive is "too much $$$" to test such a thing? No, it should not be #1 priority installation method.
There is NO REASON any general distribution should not allow such an installation method to be added if someone actually needs it. It should be straightforward and easy to add such support where needed. That is a BENEFIT. That means the code is clean and modular and MODERN that it is not hardcoded, written in 16-bit assembly for one particular CPU and only supporting installation from an internal drive a particular model of machine came with, of a particular size.
Are you retarded, or what? Serious question? You are living in the stone age, demanding hard-coded installers, because proper design is "too hard" for you and "too much work to QA" so you'd prefer something hard-coded and redoing the whole thing in a few years when the hardware has changed YET AGAIN (as you imply is inevitable, and has already happened)?
Do you not see how retarded your post is? I hope you do not write code for a living, I hope you do not design code for a living, I hope you do not run a business that uses technology at all.
Your attitude belongs in the stone age. You, are an obsolete relic of a forgotten time, where there was only 64k to cram an installer in
> If gnome components depend specifically on systemd this seems to imply that there are no well-defined interfaces an
That's because it's Gnome. Ties to systemd complicate the situation, but it was already dead to the world of sane development.
Facebook Fuckerberg had your attitude "move quickly and break things" and they have now done a 180.
Let that sink in: Fuckerberg is smarter than you, and realized that some level of stability is necessary for anything
to get done. There must be some solid foundation, to build upon.
Nothing ever gets built on top of quicksand.
FUCKERBERG is smarter than you. Let that sink in.
Well, I'm a current Debian user, and I switched from testing to stable because of problems with systemd. OTOH, there's a good reason that it's called testing.
I have not tried Jessie recently, but I have used systemd for a long time now on production versions of both Fedora and CentOS. It's fine, I'm totally OK with it.
Still, any init system that marks problems with its logging system as "won't fix" is dubious. That the main logging system is binary just makes things much worse.
You didn't say what the problem was, but if it was that it uses a custom logging format then of course that's not going to be fixed. It's a feature, old-style text files is not suitable if you want to store the metadata that the journal supports.
So does expansions like having the "init system" include things like terminal manager, etc. It even makes me tempted to go back to Etch (yah, that's a rediculuous thing to suggest, as the current stable works fine without systemd).
Systemd is not an init system. To quote the systemd home page, "systemd is a suite of basic building blocks for a Linux system." That includes an init system.
The log system corruption is wont first, because the log reader already tries to fix the logs while reading. It won't save the fixed data to avoid further corrupting the logs.
There is just no need for a separate program to fix those corruptions.
RPC allows proprietary software to leverage the functionality of your GPL software, which might go against your intent, as RPC becomes the de facto interface of increasing number of components...
Honestly, I don't buy into the whole non-GPL can't link GPL argument in the first place.
Suppose I were to tell you to grab your copy of the 3rd paperback printing of Game of Thrones and look at the second sentence on page 320. Does posting that sentence make this post a violation of GRRM's copyright? Of course not - I didn't copy anything in his book - simply mentioning that it exists and that it contains a page 320 in no way makes this post a derivative work.
Well, when you link a binary to a shared object, all you do is write a bunch of cross references saying that this function call should be replaced with an address associated with this symbol. Then a linker will replace those references when your code is loaded. None of this involves copying anything. Assuming the shared object is in RAM already being used by something else, your OS isn't even copying the GPL code at all when this happens, but even if a copy were made it is an unmodified copy of the shared object which isn't being redistributed - ie it is permitted by the GPL.
Sure, everybody says that you can't link non-GPL code to GPL code, but I am not convinced that a court is certain to uphold this. I could see issues if you try to bundle GPL and non-GPL software into a single larger work, but if you distribute the non-GPL stuff without the GPL content that problem goes away.
The main issue is no one wants to fight the court battle.
But frankly, this has all been kind of irrelevant anyway - you can distribute source packages, let the client do a compile on install, and ignore the entire affair.
The terminal manager is actually something the kernel devs wanted: They are the ones wanting to get that code out of the kernel.
Systemd is the logical place for the code to move to. The project is an umbrella project for Linux plumbing after all. Integrating there gets you into all the major distributions with time. The alternative is to waste time writing integration code for about a dozen different distributions. That is no fun at all.
Basically with systemd such clean up project which have been discussed for years now are finally becomming possible.
So many OSS projects have Swahili sounding names that I am getting really sick of it
I know that "Devuan" name is stupid, but at the very least it doesn't come out sounding like yet another Swahili project
go here to fight the root cause: boycottlinux.org
A split vote between 6 people that had to be over-ruled is hardly democracy and would be more akin to the "democracy" in African dictatorship countries.
True democracy is based on the majority of the supporting population. If Debian's user base was to vote on systemd the results would be a joke. Systemd would be laughed out of the vote quick because Debian is well known for only using tried and tested technology and setups and systemd hasn't proven itself long enough yet, not for Debian standards (at least not the Debian of old).
Just finishing sending my $40 donation to Devuan. I hope they raise millions and that it starves Debian of funding for years to come. They don’t deserve our money anymore. Debian is now an embarrassment to the Linux community. The Debian leadership ought to be ashamed for compromising the elegance, familiarity, and integrity that so many of us have come to cherish. In addition, I am now firmly convinced that Debian's leadership has been infiltrated by evil outsiders intent on derailing that which we have worked so hard to develop over the years: a great Unix-like operating system with a wonderful package manager that together comprise a distribution that works well on both the server and the desktop.
The sysvinit init system was never broken and it worked great. It’s stable. It’s well-documented. It’s cross-platform. It’s well-established and it’s reliable. It’s hand-editable, orders of magnitude smaller in codebase size, and fully open for examination on runtime deployments with general purpose text editors. I was shocked to find that a substantial percentage of Debian developers maintained indifferent/neutral attitudes when it came time to vote on maintaining a distribution that did not favor a specific init system.
It is now time to leave Debian. The leadership seems corrupt at the highest levels. They are now actively censoring internal dissent by banning discussion of init systems in their IRC chat channels – claiming that “init rants” are “killing the fun”. Their decision to ram systemd down my throat as an end user has destroyed all the respect I had held for Debian over all these years. You can go see for yourself: go visit irc.debian.org, and tell someone on a channel that you don’t like systemd, only to be hounded out of the chat room by admins and labeled a troll by real trolls and told that you can take it or leave it. It’s a rotten attitude, it seems systemic, and it’s alienating the critical sysadmin userbase that reinforces Debian’s presence on the server side, which is not a territory you want to lose – and he who rules the server can exert great influence over the client. That's something Microsoft has known all too well for years.
I’ve been using Linux continuously since the late 90s and I’ve never seen anything like this. Systemd’s architecture reeks reminiscent of Microsoft Windows’s services system and registry. The people who designed Systemd are obviously incompetent hacks with cavalier attitudes and a clear disregard for open standards and proven architectures.
Binary logs? Are you kidding me?
Merging classic disparate daemons together for a few seconds faster boot time? You’ve got to be nuts!
Introducing tons of potential new security vulnerabilities to one of the last remaining reputable high quality distributions on earth (but the way things are going, not for very much longer)? Genius!
Obsoleting many of the Linux command line tools that I spent my valuable time mastering (and they worked great, too) – just for a few seconds more boot time and a little bit of enhanced process control and binary logs? Thanks a lot, asshole!
Thanks for violating the philosophy that made Unix an international powerhouse! Turning the beloved Linux system that I fell in love with due to Microsoft's disregard to reason, and invested my career as a developer and system administrator, turning it into a scary alien freak-child of hack developers who want to be all fancy and look contemporary so they can buff up their brag-heavy resumes at the misery of end users?
This is absolutely absurd. Screw you Debian leadership! Devuan gets my money now. The $40 I sent them is only the beginning. If you care about the future of the Linux and open source community, I encourage you to do the same, and then some.
No, the reason they are forking Debian is because they don't know how apt-get and aptitude work.
Clowns.
Watch this Heartland Institute video
If I was in situation in which licensing was critical to me I would use Gentoo since as far as I know it is only decent and recent distro that actually lets you choose init system to your liking.
Debian lets you choose systemd, sysvinit or upstart. If you want something else then start filing bugs and submitting packages and patches.
Watch this Heartland Institute video
The motivation is to have a Linux distribution which [...] doesn't require systemd.
That's called Debian.
From the wiki that is linked on the ugly website:
http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/How_to_remove_systemd_from_a_Debian_jessie/sid_installation
That's worth a fork? Three shell commands?
Watch this Heartland Institute video
#systemdgate.
Prat.
Watch this Heartland Institute video
Pulse Audio sucks resources and is at best a mediocre sound solution. The CD ripping/library solution tied to it routinely failed to scan my music library. As long as systemd is that quality I expect it will get the same results. I do not install Pulse Audio and dropped Fedora because of systemd. LP can sink down a rat hole and the Linux distro world will all the better for it.
I have switched back to slackware. I have added three ARM systems to my stacks of x86 and it is good to have a consistent OS between them all.
Thanks for the input. The irrational behavior of many commenters on /. reflect a particular lack of knowledge, one based on actual experience. Limiting their use model to the desktop is their own decision and I believe they should suffer the consequences.
BTW, a correction I think. If one was to track some of the 'desktop configuration UI' I believe it actually originates from OS X. There it works well within its structure, but I have watched MSFT try to mimic it (and fail). Over the last several years Fedora has fallen down that hole as well. Basically what we have is a bad copy of a poor copy of a concept by a company that wholly owns its hardware and software stacks and is driven by designers. None of apple's attributes exist in either Linux distros nor W*.
Nothing, and I mean not one single thing, pleases Microsoft more re:Linux than seeing these dumpster fired erupt, projects fork, etc
Aye,
so here we have something (Linux) taking the dollars from Microsoft...a bunch of momsers appear, worm their way in, writing code displaying levels of ineptitude and paradigms much beloved of developers for a.n.other OS, plant the package and effectively split the techie side of the Linux user base. (Desktop users couldn't give a proverbial flying one what init system their box runs).
divide and conquer...and old, old story...
(tin foil hat?, mines a Topper don't cha know)
Its faster than Windows 7 across the board...
We hear this all the time from Windows lovers. As though speed is the single most burning issue for users. I've never noticed any particular speed issue with Windows 7. On the other hand, users are seriously slowed down when their knowledge base is discarded by wholesale (and random) changes to the user interface (Ribbon, Win8, ...)
Of course! What do you expect? Although Linux runs on laptops, HW makers really only test using drivers for Windows. And laptops these days have so many differentiating (ie. proprietary) features, getting things (especially suspend/hibernate) working is a challenge, even in Windows. And this will never change.
systemd is a solution to a non-problem. It highlights the wagon rut that Linux devs have become stuck in. Namely:
1) Because the HW vendors ignore it, Linux (still/always) has a problems supporting laptop hardware: accelerated video, wireless, suspend/resume, etc.
2) Since we can't solve the above we just tinker with other stuff, adding even more breakage to that caused by problem 1).
Basically, we're painting the deck of the Titanic, as it lists to 30 degrees, while complaining that our "Wet Paint" signs keep sliding off the deck.
to Debian Lendows 1. That's a more appropriate name :)
... let's just say agencies and contractors that manage their systems want little to do with RHEL 7. Everyone I've met who has to deal with it groans and rolls their eyes. Right now, just making 6 sing is the focus.
Just holding out for something better to come along.
Keep in mind, these guys are being managed or were brought on by the guys who cut their teeth of VMS, HP-UX and Solaris. It's like holy christ do you want us to move to Windows? I hear noises about FreeBSD and OpenBSD with increasingly frequency too.
And yet more complexity, that's what we really need! Maybe we could have each daemon which is managed by systemd run in it's own virtual machine. Think how awesome that would be in a distribution...
+1 for the yiddish - hebrew reference :)
Capacha: gentile
Is the capacha bot a prophet 12?
Yea what can be done about this, linux is crumbling before our eyes. The past was /better/ than the present :(
I'm glad about this. I'll switch my systems to this.
The problem with SystemD is that is not just an init system. Or a new init system. It touches everything -- sound, hardware, wifi, network interfaces generally, video cards, everything. The likelihood of fairly big things going wrong with such a complex system is almost certain.
Complexity increase the risk of failure. SystemD is very complex, touching the use of resources of nearly every kind on a computer.
Redhat has LOTS of developers that can fix things. Plus their system runs on a subset of available hardware, which is sure to be tested and work.
Debian while having a good pool of developers, has nowhere near the resources of Redhat. More cynical minds might say that SystemD was pushed hard by Redhat to create a situation where nothing works at all, outside of Redhat, to force people to get support contracts and switch. Why Redhat even has a tool to switch distros to Redhat based systems!
The risk for people running critical systems is that SystemD will lock up and fail with complex interactions between software and hardware. This is ironically most likely for desktop systems -- where it matters a lot if your sound card works, or video driver works --- and less on servers where who cares if your video driver or sound card fails as long as it continues to pump out webpages and be administered via SSH.
This is good news for me as a Desktop Ubuntu user as now I have a Debian apt-get type alternative to run on my laptops, which I use for business and leisure.
He talks right in that email about making it a "dependency" but about the need for support on non-linux platforms. That just clarifies that systemd doesn't want gnome to actually depend on systemd, just to have it is a build dependency and to have the features still work if it isn't there.
Now, gee, why is it that you dug out the reference, but didn't bother pointing out that it acquits systemd's author? He clearly is against gnome actually requiring systemd in the sense that people are accusing.
And yeah, any developer should realize what a PITA traditional locale support is on *nix. A solution for that is needed. Fix the problems that systemd is going solve for gnome, and it won't need to get the solutions from systemd.
Also note that it doesn't mean you'll need systemd installed to use gnome. You'll only need the modular part that has the APIs that gnome uses. Whiners should consider spending some time learning how to build packages for their favorite distro, and they can do something productive. Systemd is already modular, but the distro packages are less so. So spend some time setting up a build system that divides it up. That will save people not running the init system from needing those parts of the code to be installed.
It's well known that many packages will begin requiring systemd over time. That's why the fork wasn't announced until now, after Debian chose not to be init-agnostic once and for all.
.: Semper Absurda
But it's the "umberella" part that I don't trust. You can't get the handle without getting the ribs, too. And sometimes all I want is a small part of the handle.
That the terminal manager is spun off from the kernel is fine. That it becomes another reason to install systemd is terrible. There are too many interconnected dependencies.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Hell yea. I can't believe this nonsense is believed so widely in the open source community. If it were true that linking to a dynamic library made your program a derived work, then we wouldn't have msys/mingw since linking to Microsoft's libraries would invalidate the GPL license on all that open source software that would be a derived work of Windows.
Amazing, you can ptedict the future.
And if packages require systemd, what then?
Watch this Heartland Institute video
Honestly, I don't buy into the whole non-GPL can't link GPL argument in the first place.
Suppose I were to tell you to grab your copy of the 3rd paperback printing of Game of Thrones and look at the second sentence on page 320. Does posting that sentence make this post a violation of GRRM's copyright? Of course not - I didn't copy anything in his book - simply mentioning that it exists and that it contains a page 320 in no way makes this post a derivative work.
I believe a book over 300 pages is a poorly designed book and also breaks the reader guidelines. As such, none of my GRRM books have any pages over 300.
It's not the years, honey, it's the mileage. - Colonel Henry Walton Jones, Jr., Ph.D.
XP was buggy crap and I've lost count of the serious infections, driver errors and barfed updates that required complete rebuild to fix. Win was s massive improvement and I finally quit desktop Linux to use it full time. Windows 8 was the equivalent of Ubuntu Unity and equally reviled by end users. Win.8.1 addresses all the problems of 8 and is a seriously fast and stable OS so long as it wasn't an upgrade.
As far as Linux sound is concerned nothing beats OSS. Yes, I am that old.
Hello Erich Schubert, you piece of shit.
Jaromil is not MikeeUSA.
MikeeUSA is not Jaromil.
They have never met.
MikeeUSA is not running the fork, no one ever claimed he has
anything to do with the fork.
Jaromil is a programmer of MuSe, a wonderful midi software package
that you likely have never used because you never bothered to
attempt to release any music. Jaromil is also a distro dev
of the dyne:bolic distribution. He has experiance creating
linux distros.
MikeeUSA is a not-nearly as good programmer. He is a programmer
of GPC-Slots 2, as an early project, and various other forks
of games. He also makes media of every type for opensource games.
He (MikeeUSA) is not boss enough to be mentioned in the same sentance
as Jaromil. You are a fuck for doing that.
You are a fuck. You make programs and scripts to data mine.
You can go to hell you fucking shill piece of shit.
You are also a male-feminist.
Hopefully you die somehow sooner rather than later.
Perhaps Russia will invade, kill you and the rest of the
progressive feminists, and force everyone to be Orthodox.
Who knows.
You also enjoy spreading libels and falsehoods, aswell
as deleting corrections.
As is known: You are a fuck.
Erich Schubert
PS: Learn english. You do not seem to understand it well enough.
America crushed your country, learn the conquer's tounge please. Thank you.
I remember Fyodor of nmap claimed that any software that parsed the output from nmap was a derived work.
It sure seems like a stretch, but until there is some case law around this issue, nobody can say for sure.
I remember Fyodor of nmap claimed that any software that parsed the output from nmap was a derived work.
It sure seems like a stretch, but until there is some case law around this issue, nobody can say for sure.
Generally speaking a derived work has to contain some part of the work that it is derived from. For example, this comment is a derived comment of yours since I quoted you (though it is clearly fair use). If I didn't quote you, then it wouldn't be a derived work at all. I'm pretty sure that this is a fairly clear legal concept, but I could be wrong.
Anybody can claim anything at any time. I could claim that I own your house.
Thanks for the input. The irrational behavior of many commenters on /. reflect a particular lack of knowledge, one based on actual experience. Limiting their use model to the desktop is their own decision and I believe they should suffer the consequences.
BTW, a correction I think. If one was to track some of the 'desktop configuration UI' I believe it actually originates from OS X. There it works well within its structure, but I have watched MSFT try to mimic it (and fail). Over the last several years Fedora has fallen down that hole as well. Basically what we have is a bad copy of a poor copy of a concept by a company that wholly owns its hardware and software stacks and is driven by designers. None of apple's attributes exist in either Linux distros nor W*.
Mod up as Insightful!
So, LPGL was bad when MySQL used it (note that MariaDB is run by the same genius who was responsible for that), but now that systemd's using it, it's good? Riiiight.
You keep posting a link to this:
Hi,
This is code by someone who routinely trolls Debian. I doubt we want
any more poisonous upstreams in Debian, so I at least would prefer this
never get packaged.
He doesn't mention anything about the author's views on women. But you do.
This is known as "giving yourself away".
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Just compile from source. Oh wait, you don't understand the source? Too bad. Kind of funny that you were trolling on me about the reliance of developers who use unreleased source management and generating software tools on another thread. Now here you are saying pretty much that you can't manage modifying and compiling the source because you are dependent on said tools (used by others). Troll much? fucking asshole
captcha: truth
Jaromil is not MikeeUSA.
MikeeUSA is not Jaromil.
They have never met.
MikeeUSA is not running the fork, no one ever claimed he has
anything to do with the fork.
Jaromil is a programmer of MuSe, a wonderful midi software package
that you likely have never used because you never bothered to
attempt to release any music. Jaromil is also a distro dev
of the dyne:bolic distribution. He has experiance creating
linux distros.
MikeeUSA is a not-nearly as good programmer. He is a programmer
of GPC-Slots 2, as an early project, and various other forks
of games. He also makes media of every type for opensource games.
He (MikeeUSA) is not boss enough to be mentioned in the same sentance
as Jaromil. You are a fuck for doing that.
You are a fuck. You make programs and scripts to data mine.
You can go to hell you fucking shill piece of shit.
You are also a male-feminist.
Hopefully you die somehow sooner rather than later.
Perhaps Russia will invade, kill you and the rest of the
progressive feminists, and force everyone to be Orthodox.
Who knows.
You also enjoy spreading libels and falsehoods, aswell
as deleting corrections.
As is known: You are a fuck.
Erich Schubert
PS: Learn english. You do not seem to understand it well enough.
America crushed your country, learn the conquer's tounge please. Thank you.
Jaromil made MuSe, please try to keep up.
MikeeUSA has nothing to do with the fork.
http://youtu.be/VSbNumR9Z8k
I think you read "That means if we still care for those non-Linux platforms replacements have to be written." a bit wrong.
And no, I think he proposes exactly what people are complaining about: Gnome should depend on some new random interfaces systemd invents to solve some minor problems in a new incompatible way.
I don't want my machine configured through d-bus interfaces which talk to a set of new pointless daemons. And personally, I think all these dbus new interfaces are complete crap.
When you're accusing people who advocate something specific in a specific case of believing software "...should depend on some new random interfaces systemd invents to solve some minor problems in a new incompatible way" then you've given up on even the claim of intellectual honesty.
Especially where they cite actual, specific, non-random, real technical reasons, and you claim to be aware enough of the situation to form an opinion. If you know enough to know you disagree, you'd have to know that you're disagreeing with real things, real technical decisions that are actually happening, and have known, public reasons. Pretending to disagree, but actually just pretending that there were no reasons for the decisions, is just dishonest.
You are telling knowing lies here.
When you're accusing people who advocate something specific in a specific case of believing software "...should depend on some new random interfaces systemd invents to solve some minor problems in a new incompatible way" then you've given up on even the claim of intellectual honesty.
Especially where they cite actual, specific, non-random, real technical reasons, and you claim to be aware enough of the situation to form an opinion. If you know enough to know you disagree, you'd have to know that you're disagreeing with real things, real technical decisions that are actually happening, and have known, public reasons. Pretending to disagree, but actually just pretending that there were no reasons for the decisions, is just dishonest.
You are telling knowing lies here.
Wow, grow up.
That was never claimed.
Jaromil wrote Muse you idiot.
Learn english.