I posted the plain old text as html formatted. It was actually:
Yeah and no.
As pointed out in the article, the culprit is upower. But upower is mandatory for KDE power management. So it does not really matter whether it is Powerdevil that requires systemd or upower.
ConsoleKit2 recently gained support? Was ConsoleKit2 actually been packaged? Does upower supporting ConsoleKit2 been packaged? If not, user experience wise, that is not palatable.
And moreover, what to expect from upower? Did they not purposefully removed pm-utils support, that worked until then, in favor of systemd? Why removing support for a working solution (pm-utils) and, later, much later, adding support for some ConsoleKit2?
What is the exact plan of ConsoleKit2? Providing some systemd-like interface without being systemd? Is that what ConsoleKit2 offers that pm-utils could not? If so, wow long will it work, to attempt to write a parallel to systemd, in order to make sure that all the software that in the past worked without systemd can now work with the systemd alternative?
Just as a reminder, ConsoleKit2 exists "because there isnÃ(TM)t currently a standard for system actions like suspend/hibernate anymore. We use these features in Xfce and it would be nice to keep the session manager and power manager in sync (i.e. you inhibit something and the session manager doesnÃ(TM)t see it). Obviously thereÃ(TM)s systembsd in the works, so this is a stop gap until that matures (however long that may be). But IÃ(TM)ll happily continue to maintain and support ConsoleKit2 as long as someone finds it useful". https://erickoegel.wordpress.c... [wordpress.com]
The acknowledged benefit of systemd, as pointed out by Edmunson (link in the article) was to drop code. If ConsoleKit2 and al needs to write code to compensate from all the dropped code, following systemd, that unlikely sustainable. The stop gap project won't do.
And it is really the funny thing now with systemd: if you dont want it, you need to write everything that it does because all the anterior/historical parts, good or bad, are getting deprecated and removed.
So in order not to use systemd, you need to clone it. Bonkers.
Hence the question: will KDE be still usable in 2016 without systemd.
"1) calling an OS abstraction layer an init system when it clearly is far more than that (that seems to be perpetrated primarily by the detractors)"
That is interesting. So, we have a kernel that is an abstraction layer with the hardware. We have systemd that is an abstraction layer between the kernel and the desktop environments. Do we actually need two abstraction layers? Detractors talks about an init system, because it is obvious we need one. But one extra layer, do we?
"4) Having an OSAL at all? Though frankly, I think it's long overdue - one of my greatest annoyances with Linux is that practically every piece of nontrivial software seems to need to include explicit support and custom binaries for every major distro branch it runs on. That's a huge drain on developer time and energy [...]"
So systemd is an operating system in itself, in this view. Why not. Not sure that how it has been sold, though.
What are you exactly talking about when you mention "the old days when we did not have desktop environment", and how it is relevant to systemd?
I still have a valid ~/.xsession, startx still works. In/var/log/Xorg.0.log I can still check that the X Window System (well, Xorg now) actually "manage the mouse/keyboard directly", even though desktop environment can adjust it.
What does even mean starting GNOME/KDE "from the system"? "From the system"? From a graphical desktop manager you mean? Well, before kdm and gdm, there was obviously xdm. Initial release october 1988. By the "old days", you mean before 1988?
I'm quite sure any so called environment was quite limited then, mainly a window manager obviously - handling desk, list of running apps, a panel, that was already a lot considering the hardware.
Window Maker was part of GNUStep, with already in mind of doing an environment. GNUStep dates from ~1995. Is that too young?
When KDE and GNOME made their first release, they were a desktop environment because they attempted to provide a consistent set of applications, with a consistent graphical user interface. There was some gcalc, kcalc, konqueror, etc. It was a graphical layer on top of the system.
What is your point about the good old days? That desktop environment are now better than when they did not existed? That progress has been made over years? That all the idea behind systemd are not bad? And then what?
How does this reply to this specific topic: "Again, the point under discussion is neither KDE nor Gnome should depend on a particular init system."?
One day power management appeared and "they" found that very cool indeed.
Then systemd appeared. "They" adopted it early in 2012. But "they" recently decided to stop using it because it failed to do stuff that worked without since decades (like mounting NFS shares and stuff at the proper time and many other miserable issues regarding) and found out actually easier to do without.
But suddenly "they" found out that parts of KDE where stopping to function properly. Things that worked since long before.
So you may not have any sympathy from where you sit. I did not start using GNU/Linux or KDE because I wanted to use a system as designed by developers. I think that is exactly because GNU/Linux enabled me to go beyond what the developers had in mind first that I liked it. Now, I just wonder if KDE wont be too much work for not enough benefits in the long run.
"Developers have the final say" when it comes to what the software looks like. Sure. Not when it comes to how succesfull is the software.
GNU/Linux is not really famous for desktop environment. It is understandable that desktop environment developers are happy to avoid systemd to allow them to "throw away large amounts of code whilst at the same time providing a better user experience". My user experience is that they threw something that worked for something that does not always (systemd does not work for me; failures to handle NFS mounts, etc, many little crap that does not matter that much expect: it worked before, correcting them was ununderstandably painy).
I perfectly understand why they keep going with systemd. That is exactly why I wonder if KDE without systemd is sustainable.
Yeah and no.
As pointed out in the article, the culprit is upower. But upower is mandatory for KDE power management. So it does not really matter whether it is Powerdevil that requires systemd or upower.
ConsoleKit2 recently gained support? Was ConsoleKit2 actually been packaged? Does upower supporting ConsoleKit2 been packaged? If not, user experience wise, that is not palatable.
And moreover, what to expect from upower? Did they not purposefully removed pm-utils support, that worked until then, in favor of systemd?
Why removing support for a working solution (pm-utils) and, later, much later, adding support for some ConsoleKit2? What is the exact plan of ConsoleKit2? Providing some systemd-like interface without being systemd? Is that what ConsoleKit2 offers that pm-utils could not?
If so, wow long will it work, to attempt to write a parallel to systemd, in order to make sure that all the software that in the past worked without systemd can now work with the systemd alternative?
Just as a reminder, ConsoleKit2 exists "because there isnâ(TM)t currently a standard for system actions like suspend/hibernate anymore. We use these features in Xfce and it would be nice to keep the session manager and power manager in sync (i.e. you inhibit something and the session manager doesnâ(TM)t see it). Obviously thereâ(TM)s systembsd in the works, so this is a stop gap until that matures (however long that may be). But Iâ(TM)ll happily continue to maintain and support ConsoleKit2 as long as someone finds it useful". https://erickoegel.wordpress.c...
The acknowledged benefit of systemd, as pointed out by Edmunson (link in the article) was to drop code. If ConsoleKit2 and al needs to write code to compensate from all the dropped code, following systemd, that unlikely sustainable. The stop gap project won't do.
And it is really the funny thing now with systemd: if you dont want it, you need to write everything that it does because all the anterior/historical parts, good or bad, are getting deprecated and removed. So in order not to use systemd, you need to clone it. Bonkers.
Hence the question: will KDE be still usable in 2016 without systemd.
What matters to the law is that cops go after people that actually commit criminal act. No one can claim to be victim of injustice because he got caught and not one another. So your predictions about who the cops will go after are irrelevant.
Poor guy using a Bentley inherited from his grandma? Blam.
Overly rich guy speeding like mad with his used Dacia Logan? Nothing.
So you think it's smarter not to evaluate the daily earnings/spendings of someone but a fixed amount we cannot even be sure it relates to anything. Sure.
Or maybe, like it's the case in many countries already, each fine could points on the driving license that have limited amount of it to be valid.
If you need to get back a driving license every 3 or 4 fines, it's not such a good deal anymore for anyone.
"For example, if $1,000,000 in fines were collected for a town with 10,000 property tax assessments, they could knock $100 off of each tax bill. "
So basically, every year tax bill would change. Depending on the amount of fines, people would get good or very very bad surprise. Seems like a system to put fragile people into bankrupt.
"Before a system like this is in place, the financial incentive for cops to ticket people needs to be removed. "
Why? Because you think a guy with millions per year cannot afford a lawyer if he's victim of crooks?
In France, "jours-amendes" are not really sliding-scale fines. They are an alternative to jail sentence:
- you can get such fine only for serious offences that can actually lead to jail - not for random traffic tickets
- the sum is not based on what you need per day, or half; you are given a sum to pay and if you fail to you actually go to jail proportionaly to what you failed to pay (ex: 60 jours-amende at 10€, you must pay 60x10 = 600€. If you pay only 500€, you are jailed (600-500)/10 = 10 days)
In the linked articlea are given example of the edits:
" “Garner raised both his arms in the air” was changed to “Garner flailed his arms about as he spoke.”
“[P]ush Garner's face into the sidewalk” was changed to “push Garner's head down into the sidewalk.”
“Use of the chokehold has been prohibited” was changed to “Use of the chokehold is legal, but has been prohibited.”
The sentence, “Garner, who was considerably larger than any of the officers, continued to struggle with them,” was added to the description of the incident.
Instances of the word “chokehold” were replaced twice, once to “chokehold or headlock,” and once to “respiratory distress.”"
How is that even a problem to wikipedia, since it's more precise? What is even the problem since Justice ruled not to indict NYPD Officer Daniel Pantaleo in the death of Eric Garner?
Later on:
"A user on the NYPD network made a second edit to the Sean Bell entry on Dec. 23, 2009, this time changing “one Latino and two African-American men were shot a total of fifty times” to “one Latino and two African-American men were shot at a total of fifty times” "
Once again, it's more precise. How such edit cannot be seen as an improvement to wikipedia. Do people need to picture corpse with 50 bullets or just imagine 50 bullets being shot, while maybe only 2 or 3 actually reach the target?
If you have only basic knowledge about History, you definitely know that this kind of dumb equation never works. And if you have any clues about Ancient Rome History, you know anyway that the notion of collapse is just a posture, while the Occident Empire actually evolved into something else while the Orient Empire stayed for a thousand years after the supposed collapse.
The link you provide also indicate something overly suspicious about this rug story:
"One employee, Horvath says, thought she was rejected for membership in Double Union, a feminist hackerspace, because of the rug. Double Union did parody the rug on its crowdfunding page, but denied that it would reject a possible member because of the rug."
Slashdot Mirror
I posted the plain old text as html formatted. It was actually:
Yeah and no.
As pointed out in the article, the culprit is upower. But upower is mandatory for KDE power management. So it does not really matter whether it is Powerdevil that requires systemd or upower.
ConsoleKit2 recently gained support? Was ConsoleKit2 actually been packaged? Does upower supporting ConsoleKit2 been packaged? If not, user experience wise, that is not palatable.
And moreover, what to expect from upower? Did they not purposefully removed pm-utils support, that worked until then, in favor of systemd? Why removing support for a working solution (pm-utils) and, later, much later, adding support for some ConsoleKit2?
What is the exact plan of ConsoleKit2? Providing some systemd-like interface without being systemd? Is that what ConsoleKit2 offers that pm-utils could not? If so, wow long will it work, to attempt to write a parallel to systemd, in order to make sure that all the software that in the past worked without systemd can now work with the systemd alternative?
Just as a reminder, ConsoleKit2 exists "because there isnÃ(TM)t currently a standard for system actions like suspend/hibernate anymore. We use these features in Xfce and it would be nice to keep the session manager and power manager in sync (i.e. you inhibit something and the session manager doesnÃ(TM)t see it). Obviously thereÃ(TM)s systembsd in the works, so this is a stop gap until that matures (however long that may be). But IÃ(TM)ll happily continue to maintain and support ConsoleKit2 as long as someone finds it useful". https://erickoegel.wordpress.c... [wordpress.com]
The acknowledged benefit of systemd, as pointed out by Edmunson (link in the article) was to drop code. If ConsoleKit2 and al needs to write code to compensate from all the dropped code, following systemd, that unlikely sustainable. The stop gap project won't do.
And it is really the funny thing now with systemd: if you dont want it, you need to write everything that it does because all the anterior/historical parts, good or bad, are getting deprecated and removed.
So in order not to use systemd, you need to clone it. Bonkers.
Hence the question: will KDE be still usable in 2016 without systemd.
"1) calling an OS abstraction layer an init system when it clearly is far more than that (that seems to be perpetrated primarily by the detractors)"
That is interesting.
So, we have a kernel that is an abstraction layer with the hardware.
We have systemd that is an abstraction layer between the kernel and the desktop environments.
Do we actually need two abstraction layers? Detractors talks about an init system, because it is obvious we need one. But one extra layer, do we?
"4) Having an OSAL at all? Though frankly, I think it's long overdue - one of my greatest annoyances with Linux is that practically every piece of nontrivial software seems to need to include explicit support and custom binaries for every major distro branch it runs on. That's a huge drain on developer time and energy [...]"
So systemd is an operating system in itself, in this view. Why not. Not sure that how it has been sold, though.
What are you exactly talking about when you mention "the old days when we did not have desktop environment", and how it is relevant to systemd?
I still have a valid ~/.xsession, startx still works. /var/log/Xorg.0.log I can still check that the X Window System (well, Xorg now) actually "manage the mouse/keyboard directly", even though desktop environment can adjust it.
In
What does even mean starting GNOME/KDE "from the system"? "From the system"? From a graphical desktop manager you mean? Well, before kdm and gdm, there was obviously xdm. Initial release october 1988. By the "old days", you mean before 1988?
I'm quite sure any so called environment was quite limited then, mainly a window manager obviously - handling desk, list of running apps, a panel, that was already a lot considering the hardware.
Window Maker was part of GNUStep, with already in mind of doing an environment. GNUStep dates from ~1995. Is that too young?
When KDE and GNOME made their first release, they were a desktop environment because they attempted to provide a consistent set of applications, with a consistent graphical user interface. There was some gcalc, kcalc, konqueror, etc. It was a graphical layer on top of the system.
What is your point about the good old days? That desktop environment are now better than when they did not existed? That progress has been made over years? That all the idea behind systemd are not bad? And then what?
How does this reply to this specific topic: "Again, the point under discussion is neither KDE nor Gnome should depend on a particular init system."?
"They" first used KDE around 1998.
One day power management appeared and "they" found that very cool indeed.
Then systemd appeared. "They" adopted it early in 2012. But "they" recently decided to stop using it because it failed to do stuff that worked without since decades (like mounting NFS shares and stuff at the proper time and many other miserable issues regarding) and found out actually easier to do without.
But suddenly "they" found out that parts of KDE where stopping to function properly. Things that worked since long before.
So you may not have any sympathy from where you sit. I did not start using GNU/Linux or KDE because I wanted to use a system as designed by developers. I think that is exactly because GNU/Linux enabled me to go beyond what the developers had in mind first that I liked it.
Now, I just wonder if KDE wont be too much work for not enough benefits in the long run.
"Developers have the final say" when it comes to what the software looks like. Sure. Not when it comes to how succesfull is the software.
GNU/Linux is not really famous for desktop environment. It is understandable that desktop environment developers are happy to avoid systemd to allow them to "throw away large amounts of code whilst at the same time providing a better user experience". My user experience is that they threw something that worked for something that does not always (systemd does not work for me; failures to handle NFS mounts, etc, many little crap that does not matter that much expect: it worked before, correcting them was ununderstandably painy).
I perfectly understand why they keep going with systemd. That is exactly why I wonder if KDE without systemd is sustainable.
Yeah and no. As pointed out in the article, the culprit is upower. But upower is mandatory for KDE power management. So it does not really matter whether it is Powerdevil that requires systemd or upower. ConsoleKit2 recently gained support? Was ConsoleKit2 actually been packaged? Does upower supporting ConsoleKit2 been packaged? If not, user experience wise, that is not palatable. And moreover, what to expect from upower? Did they not purposefully removed pm-utils support, that worked until then, in favor of systemd? Why removing support for a working solution (pm-utils) and, later, much later, adding support for some ConsoleKit2? What is the exact plan of ConsoleKit2? Providing some systemd-like interface without being systemd? Is that what ConsoleKit2 offers that pm-utils could not? If so, wow long will it work, to attempt to write a parallel to systemd, in order to make sure that all the software that in the past worked without systemd can now work with the systemd alternative? Just as a reminder, ConsoleKit2 exists "because there isnâ(TM)t currently a standard for system actions like suspend/hibernate anymore. We use these features in Xfce and it would be nice to keep the session manager and power manager in sync (i.e. you inhibit something and the session manager doesnâ(TM)t see it). Obviously thereâ(TM)s systembsd in the works, so this is a stop gap until that matures (however long that may be). But Iâ(TM)ll happily continue to maintain and support ConsoleKit2 as long as someone finds it useful". https://erickoegel.wordpress.c... The acknowledged benefit of systemd, as pointed out by Edmunson (link in the article) was to drop code. If ConsoleKit2 and al needs to write code to compensate from all the dropped code, following systemd, that unlikely sustainable. The stop gap project won't do. And it is really the funny thing now with systemd: if you dont want it, you need to write everything that it does because all the anterior/historical parts, good or bad, are getting deprecated and removed. So in order not to use systemd, you need to clone it. Bonkers. Hence the question: will KDE be still usable in 2016 without systemd.
What matters to the law is that cops go after people that actually commit criminal act. No one can claim to be victim of injustice because he got caught and not one another. So your predictions about who the cops will go after are irrelevant.
Poor guy using a Bentley inherited from his grandma? Blam. Overly rich guy speeding like mad with his used Dacia Logan? Nothing. So you think it's smarter not to evaluate the daily earnings/spendings of someone but a fixed amount we cannot even be sure it relates to anything. Sure.
Or maybe, like it's the case in many countries already, each fine could points on the driving license that have limited amount of it to be valid. If you need to get back a driving license every 3 or 4 fines, it's not such a good deal anymore for anyone.
"For example, if $1,000,000 in fines were collected for a town with 10,000 property tax assessments, they could knock $100 off of each tax bill. " So basically, every year tax bill would change. Depending on the amount of fines, people would get good or very very bad surprise. Seems like a system to put fragile people into bankrupt. "Before a system like this is in place, the financial incentive for cops to ticket people needs to be removed. " Why? Because you think a guy with millions per year cannot afford a lawyer if he's victim of crooks?
In France, "jours-amendes" are not really sliding-scale fines. They are an alternative to jail sentence: - you can get such fine only for serious offences that can actually lead to jail - not for random traffic tickets - the sum is not based on what you need per day, or half; you are given a sum to pay and if you fail to you actually go to jail proportionaly to what you failed to pay (ex: 60 jours-amende at 10€, you must pay 60x10 = 600€. If you pay only 500€, you are jailed (600-500)/10 = 10 days)
In the linked articlea are given example of the edits: " “Garner raised both his arms in the air” was changed to “Garner flailed his arms about as he spoke.” “[P]ush Garner's face into the sidewalk” was changed to “push Garner's head down into the sidewalk.” “Use of the chokehold has been prohibited” was changed to “Use of the chokehold is legal, but has been prohibited.” The sentence, “Garner, who was considerably larger than any of the officers, continued to struggle with them,” was added to the description of the incident. Instances of the word “chokehold” were replaced twice, once to “chokehold or headlock,” and once to “respiratory distress.”" How is that even a problem to wikipedia, since it's more precise? What is even the problem since Justice ruled not to indict NYPD Officer Daniel Pantaleo in the death of Eric Garner? Later on: "A user on the NYPD network made a second edit to the Sean Bell entry on Dec. 23, 2009, this time changing “one Latino and two African-American men were shot a total of fifty times” to “one Latino and two African-American men were shot at a total of fifty times” " Once again, it's more precise. How such edit cannot be seen as an improvement to wikipedia. Do people need to picture corpse with 50 bullets or just imagine 50 bullets being shot, while maybe only 2 or 3 actually reach the target?
If you have only basic knowledge about History, you definitely know that this kind of dumb equation never works. And if you have any clues about Ancient Rome History, you know anyway that the notion of collapse is just a posture, while the Occident Empire actually evolved into something else while the Orient Empire stayed for a thousand years after the supposed collapse.
The link you provide also indicate something overly suspicious about this rug story: "One employee, Horvath says, thought she was rejected for membership in Double Union, a feminist hackerspace, because of the rug. Double Union did parody the rug on its crowdfunding page, but denied that it would reject a possible member because of the rug."