Slashdot Mirror
Systemd-Free Devuan 2.0 'ASCII' Officially Released (devuan.org)
"Dear Init Freedom Lovers..." begins the announcement at Devuan.org:
We are happy to announce that Devuan GNU+Linux 2.0 ASCII Stable is finally available. Devuan is a GNU+Linux distribution committed to providing a universal, stable, dependable, free software operating system that uses and promotes alternatives to systemd and its components.
Devuan 2.0 ASCII runs on several architectures. Installer CD and DVD ISOs, as well as desktop-live and minimal-live ISOs, are available for i386 and amd64. Ready-to-use images can be downloaded for a number of ARM platforms and SOCs, including Raspberry Pi, BeagleBone, OrangePi, BananaPi, OLinuXino, Cubieboard, Nokia and Motorola mobile phones, and several Chromebooks, as well as for Virtualbox/QEMU/Vagrant. The Devuan 2.0 ASCII installer ISOs offer a variety of Desktop Environments including Xfce, KDE, MATE, Cinnamon, LXQt, with others available post-install. The expert install mode now offers a choice of either SysVinit or OpenRC as init system...
We would like to thank the entire Devuan community for the continued support, feedback, and collaboration....
The release notes include information on Devuan's new network of package repository mirrors, and they're also touting their "direct and easy upgrade paths" from Devuan Jessie, Debian Jessie and Debian Stretch.
Devuan 2.0 ASCII runs on several architectures. Installer CD and DVD ISOs, as well as desktop-live and minimal-live ISOs, are available for i386 and amd64. Ready-to-use images can be downloaded for a number of ARM platforms and SOCs, including Raspberry Pi, BeagleBone, OrangePi, BananaPi, OLinuXino, Cubieboard, Nokia and Motorola mobile phones, and several Chromebooks, as well as for Virtualbox/QEMU/Vagrant. The Devuan 2.0 ASCII installer ISOs offer a variety of Desktop Environments including Xfce, KDE, MATE, Cinnamon, LXQt, with others available post-install. The expert install mode now offers a choice of either SysVinit or OpenRC as init system...
We would like to thank the entire Devuan community for the continued support, feedback, and collaboration....
The release notes include information on Devuan's new network of package repository mirrors, and they're also touting their "direct and easy upgrade paths" from Devuan Jessie, Debian Jessie and Debian Stretch.
I'm waiting for Devuan EBCDIC personally.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
I was the second Debian project leader. These days, I prefer to run Devuan, a true Debian derivative engineered the way I would probably have decided to make it. It's efficient and trouble-free. Thanks to the Devuan developers for all of the work!
Bruce Perens.
... is a Poettering-Free Zone!
#DeleteChrome
Except for losing log messages and not providing a proper exit status. It's really hard to troubleshoot problems without log messages.
Log message problems can be fixed (maybe by a different team, though), if that were the worst thing, it wouldn't be a problem. The problem is systemd is crappy architecture, and you don't want to build stuff on top of crappy architecture to get it embedded deeply within the system, you want to keep it flexible and replaceable. That's why this project is good even if you never use it, because it will improve the quality of the software you do use. And those people who do like systemd can use it.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
I've had my own ideas about how to "better" engineer Devuan, but there are so many things to do and so little Bruce. :-)
With respect, I think your argument is mooted by the fact that Debian itself exists and is a viable alternative if you want to load SystemD. However, it is entirely possible for you to create what you believe is missing in Devuan, and provide it. You can ignore the fact that such a thing would be more for a ritual definition of universality than for anyone to practically use it - since you have stated your own belief that fulfilling that definition is important.
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Funny how so many people claim systemd is a lousy architecture to build upon, yet never provide any evidence to support those claims
Nah, I did a fairly long analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of systemd in my journal. If you disagree, go ahead and tell me: it will increase my knowledge.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Thanks for the bit on mother Theresa. You seem to have your brains together so can you explain what the problems with ststemd are?
caveat: my brain is known to be made of mush, sometimes. as in, some form of dyslexia / delay means i get basic boolean logic wrong, ok? :)
* the first clue is this: https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/... which contains 27 separate and distinct entries, three of them for this year alone. by contrast try searching for "sysvinit" and you get *ONE* entry dating back to 1999. you'd need to start searching for "bash" and start doing a bit more investigation (a bash search refers to several variants) to get a proper comparison.
* the systemd team have been known to ignore bugreports, closing them arbitrarily. not just once but repeatedly. i've seen posts made by people on here which gave references. basically they don't listen to constructive feedback.
* the scope creep on systemd is very insidious and dangerous. there's no consultation about the impact of the changes being made: they're just blithely "handed out" and if you don't like it go fuck yourself is the general attitude. management of firewall rules, fstab, networking, process control: all these things are completely insane to be managed exclusively by PID 1. one mistake and your entire system is compromised (or falls over).
so basically it's down to abdication of responsibility of developers and users to a team that has repeatedly demonstrated a total lack of willingness to recognise and take seriously the responsibility of their role... or more to the point that the distro maintainers *CHOSE WITHOUT CONSULTATION* to forcibly abdicate responsibility on BEHALF of users, the maintenance and running of their system to systemd's developers. if you are not familiar with what happened with the debian "vote": systemd was the absolute worst and least-favoured choice by far and above... and absolutely no explanation as to why that vote was completely and utterly ignored has ever been given.
there are many many articles and examples of why systemd is an extremely dangerous *technical* choice, but mainly it's down to the fact that the users haven't been given any choice - right across the board - due to all major GNU/Linux distros swapping over all at the same time like a flock of birds / shoal of fish. try doing "apt-get --purge remove libsystemd1" and see what happens (or equivalent on fedora, or archlinux). that there *is* no choice is in itself a dangerous precedent (a monoculture).
basically it's really hard to describe.
"You're not paying for this racoon we are setting loose in your kitchen, so you have no place to make demands of someone who is giving you a raccoon for free."
https://ewontfix.com/14/ is a good article which goes into detail about why systemd is a bad architecture.
"How do I know there is nothing better? All the major distros have adopted systemd. If there was a better alternative I'm sure they would adopt it."
Bollocks. They adopted it because it became a dependency of other software, because the devs of that software were lazy and/or incompetent, like gnome. All except redhat of course which did it deliberately to the rest of us.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
ls -lh /lib/systemd/systemd /lib/systemd/systemd
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1.6M Feb 1 23:31
It's clearly not a lithe, slender little thing running as pid 1.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Perhaps you have an alternative explanation, if so I would like to hear it.
Yeah, I do, I discussed it at length in my journal, with this particular entry being the core. Lennart Poettering spent a lot of time working with distro builders and figuring out what would make things easier for them. So that one use case it does well, and I commend it for that.
And I would say there are other use cases it does well, but that is the most important one. Why am I against it? Again I discussed it at length, but the short answer I will restate from above: when pieces of the system become too entwined, that's bad architecture.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Neither claim which is true. No logs have ever been dropped by systemd
Many people who have tried to troubleshoot early boot issues (mostly with RAID) disagree with you, including myself.
and the exit on failure is because the daemon fails after systemd did it's thing
*its
and people not fully understanding how asynchronous starting works.
Too bad they had to make it so complicated to understand. It just worked before.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
It's great to see a systemd-free distro making progress. Hope they keep releasing.
And remember, Slackware is the oldest GNU/Linux distro in active maintenance, and is also free of systemd. Even the development version (Slackware-current) has no systemd.
-- Look to the Rose that blows about us--"Lo, Laughing," she says, "into the World I blow..."