Debian Technical Committee Votes For Systemd Over Upstart 379
sfcrazy writes "Bdale Garbee,chairman of the Debian Technical Committee, called for a ballot from the TC to chose the default init system. The votes are in systemd is the clear winner here. Bdale himself voted for systemd."
Incorrect summary. (Score:4, Informative)
the default init system for Linux architectures in jessie
Soooo.... (Score:2, Informative)
Having been a well behaved, not overly vocal member of the slashdot community for many years (10? more?), today, I found myself banned by ip. and my Karma (which has always been neutral) reduced to "terrible".
I had posted 10 times over the last 48 hrs, in support of the slashdot boycott. Most sensible debate, some houmour.
You know once the powers that be need to silence those who gently disapprove, that it's all gone terribly wrong, and those pushing for change that damages everyone are too weak to even make a sensible argument.
Oh Dear.
More on systemd... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I see a lot of discussion about systemd (Score:5, Informative)
systemd versus upstart is mostly anti-canonical sentiment coming home to roost. Canonical has made it clear they don't want to play nice with the wider non-canonical community, and now that's going reciprocal. In a way, systemd and Wayland should be grateful. A non trivial amount of the increased urgency behind migration to those schemes are driven by a distaste for canonical as they push upstart and Mir.
systemd versus sysv init most visibly leads to faster boot (by providing a richer dependency model and avoiding spawning as many processes through skipping shell scripts a lot). The downside should be clear in general, the philosophy leaning more toward compiled modules over shell scripts means it's harder for a lay person to dig in and follow things and understand how they work. If you dig deeper you'll notice that the number of getty processes is lower for most people by skipping spawning such things until the VC is active and other similar things. These are things that really don't meaningfully add to the experience in 99.999% of cases, but it's the sorts of little awkward/arbitrary things that systemd aspires to be a bit more fancy about managing. If a distribution fully embraces systemd philosophy (e.g. Fedora), no more plaintext logfile to peruse. You get tools to do some more sophisticated things to log files, but if you find yourself with the data in a place without ready access to those tools, you will be out of luck.
Re:More information on the topic (Score:5, Informative)
You're looking at the upstart position document:
https://wiki.debian.org/Debate... [debian.org] and https://wiki.debian.org/Debate... [debian.org] represent broader parts of the debate.
Re:Beware journald... (Score:4, Informative)
Essentially all important server distros have caved at this point. RHEL7 is systemd. Pretty sure SuSE and Mageia are (or soon will be) systemd, if there are any of those left. Arch for the server dangerous-livers is systemd. Now Debian.
I would call all of them lemmings (except Red Hat, which is the actual instigator), except realistically what were they to do? Get left by the wayside? The writing on the wall is clear. For me it's enough to pay a lot more attention to BSD.
Re:Incorrect summary. (Score:5, Informative)
Linux architectures, not GNU/Linux. In this context it's not about the whole operating system, it's about the kernel itself. Aside of Linux architectures there are also kFreeBSD architectures in Debian - with "k" added to make it clear that it's about FreeBSD kernel, not OS.
Don't try to fix other people when you don't know what them (and in turn you as well) are talking about.
Re:Incorrect summary. (Score:2, Informative)
How is that misleading? The next release of debian is codenamed jessie, apparently.
Nether Debian GNU/Hurd or Debian GNU/kFreeBSD are receiving systemd. Just Debian GNU/Linux.
Re:Die, Ubuntu, Die (on topic = marginal) (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Beware journald... (Score:3, Informative)
As someone who does run Linux on desktops as well (and has been doing so for much longer than a week) I can tell you conclusively that if you think you need to become a Bash guru just to make "a few changes to network startup" then YOU ARE DOING IT WRONG probably starting with not reading the distro-specific setup instructions, and making the typical noob mistake of assuming that just because something seems evidently possible to accomplish without reading said instructions that reading the instructions wouldn't have uncovered a much easier approach, i.e. the way it was meant to be done.
Either that or you're misrepresenting the amount of functional alteration you're attempting to actually accomplish with your setup, in which case... boy will you feel betrayed when you find out what type of stuff you'll need to "become a guru in" the first time you don't like the out-of-the-box functionality systemd provides.
systemd is broken by design, (Score:3, Informative)
read more about it at: http://ewontfix.com/14/