Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×
Debian Operating Systems Linux

Joey Hess Resigns From Debian 450

An anonymous reader writes: Long-time Debian developer Joey Hess has posted a resignation letter to the Debian mailing list. Hess was a big part of the development of the Debian installer, debhelper, Alien, and other systems. He says, "It's become abundantly clear that this is no longer the project I originally joined in 1996. We've made some good things, and I wish everyone well, but I'm out. ... If I have one regret from my 18 years in Debian, it's that when the Debian constitution was originally proposed, despite seeing it as dubious, I neglected to speak out against it. It's clear to me now that it's a toxic document, that has slowly but surely led Debian in very unhealthy directions."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Joey Hess Resigns From Debian

Comments Filter:
  • DebianNoob (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 08, 2014 @12:41PM (#48340747)

    What directions is he referring to? What's seen as wrong with the constitution? Toxic?

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      My impression of Debian has always been that they take themselves very seriously, especially compared to other distributions. They seem to have a very thought out management structure and inner politics that probably rival large companies. Years ago I remember reading some discussion and coming to the somewhat painful realization that open source now has and possibly even needs PHBes. My guess is that it has continued to (de)volve down the political line, and become the same broken mess s most political sys

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        No need to peek, if your interest is piqued you can just look, it's pretty public.
      • by gl4ss ( 559668 )

        open source doesn't as much need phb's as much as it attracts them.

        can't code, want to contribute? become a phb! if someone calls you out on it when you try to make some decision or another so that you can have your name on some decision or another, just call them toxic and quote some club rule!

        • open source doesn't as much need phb's as much as it attracts them.

          can't code, want to contribute? become a phb! if someone calls you out on it when you try to make some decision or another so that you can have your name on some decision or another, just call them toxic and quote some club rule!

          Is that really what has been happening?

          I have never worked with a large open source project (beyond bug reports), but I always suspected they had a real need for project managers, technical writers/documenters, and various other support personnel.

  • Gnome3, systemd etc. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 08, 2014 @12:45PM (#48340765)

    After all of the rhetoric regarding "community" you can see how Debian has fallen short. While I still like and use Debian currently I am seriously looking at other options. When Debian pushed Gnome3 and the community didn't like it they moved forward with it as the default desktop anyway. Now there is the systemd debacle. A large number of people have voiced their disapproval, but No, Debian is going to go down that route anyway. Perhaps this could be a real gain for the BSDs?

    • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 08, 2014 @12:51PM (#48340787)
      In fact, he is very supportive of systemd, as evidenced by many of his mailing list posts. Here's one example: https://lists.debian.org/debia... [debian.org] Pure speculation: He is fed up with people like Ian Jackson abusing the constitution to push their agenda.
      • by mvdwege ( 243851 ) <mvdwege@mail.com> on Saturday November 08, 2014 @01:02PM (#48340835) Homepage Journal

        In fact, someone on the Phoronix forums posted a bunch of links to Joey's debian-devel posts [phoronix.com] which seems to bear this out.

        Especially the first one is a clanger. If you can't support systemd on technical grounds without getting threats, something is very toxic indeed.

        And no, that first post is not directly related to the Debian Constitution. That the idiotic GR trying to override the Technical Committee decision two weeks before the Jessie freeze is inspired by this kind of drivel, and that the Constitution makes these kind of purely political overrides of the technical decisions possible is rather evident though.

        • The GR doesn't override the TC decision, it enhances it.

          The CTTE decision said "systemd is the default init for jessie", without saying whether non-defaults are to be supported or dropped. This is the part the GR is for.

        • by Golden_Rider ( 137548 ) on Saturday November 08, 2014 @01:58PM (#48341109)

          In fact, someone on the Phoronix forums posted a bunch of links to Joey's debian-devel posts [phoronix.com] which seems to bear this out.

          Especially the first one is a clanger. If you can't support systemd on technical grounds without getting threats, something is very toxic indeed.

          And no, that first post is not directly related to the Debian Constitution. That the idiotic GR trying to override the Technical Committee decision two weeks before the Jessie freeze is inspired by this kind of drivel, and that the Constitution makes these kind of purely political overrides of the technical decisions possible is rather evident though.

          From what I read there, stuff like https://lists.debian.org/debia... [debian.org] (trying to make technical decisions via politics when there actually is no disagreement between devs which needs any help with the decision-making) also contributed to his decision to quit.

        • If you can't support systemd on technical grounds without getting threats, something is very toxic indeed.

          Under no circumstances has systemd been supported on technical grounds (those proposing it keep repeating this ad nauseam in the hope it will just be accepted as fact), nor has there been any extensive discussion in the manner he describes. systemd has been imposed as a de facto default almost overnight and the general consensus has been that it would be accepted with nary a whisper. Now that there is some pushback various characters are getting upset.

          Given that this is an extremely core piece of softwar

          • by mvdwege ( 243851 )

            No. Systemd supporters give plenty of technical reasons for their support. In my case (for one thing) it is wanting event based processing of service management. Systemd offers that, sysV rc doesn't. Like it or not, that's a technical reason.

            On the other hand, you anti guys keep bringing up things like this shit, or 'not Unix philosophy', or 'monolithic hairball'. Those are not technical arguments.

            Do me a favour, and refrain from answering until you can actually muster a technical argument against systemd.

    • by jones_supa ( 887896 ) on Saturday November 08, 2014 @01:07PM (#48340861)

      When Debian pushed Gnome3 and the community didn't like it they moved forward with it as the default desktop anyway. Now there is the systemd debacle. A large number of people have voiced their disapproval, but No, Debian is going to go down that route anyway.

      GNOME3 and SystemD are a natural choice because the developer community behind them is so large. Hopefully that leads to software which has less glitches, less vulnerabilities, new features are implemented faster, documentation is up to date, and quality assurance works. These days open source projects are so complex that you really need the pure manpower. This is probably the direction which we are even more heading towards in the future.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 08, 2014 @02:04PM (#48341157)

        I was kind of neutral about systemd until I realized that the only way to get centralized logging out of systemd boxes is to turn on syslog mode (journald has no concept of network transport).

        At that point, I realized that the systemd developers aren't actually server admins.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Anonymous Coward

          This makes no sense. In the past to get network logging you needed to install a syslog daemon. And with systemd you still need to install a syslog daemon. What's the big deal?

      • by Mirar ( 264502 ) on Saturday November 08, 2014 @02:43PM (#48341353) Homepage

        Gnome3, systemd, wayland, pulseaudio etc might (or might not) be good ideas. But they should probably not be introduced before they are completely bug-free -- or at least more bug-free then the thing they will replace. (And they should be better designed than the thing they are trying to replace.)

        This has not always been the case. Actually, this has rarely been the case. They have been introduced as the new hip thing despite bugs and design flaws.

        And considering that the *ix world is full of people who don't like change - it's one of the main selling points - changing things because it's hip, doesn't solve the problem, introduces new bugs and introduces the well known problem of update-your-legacy-system-or-don't-update-your-machine-ever-again doesn't really sit well with everyone.

        • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 08, 2014 @08:33PM (#48342783)

          I should add to this that Debian has built a reputation, over more than a decade, for being a conservative, rock-solid stable distro. By adopting new packages which are less stable than their predecessors, Debian, more so than other distros, seriously erodes its reputation.

        • Yeah, we shouldn't have released X11 until it was 100% bug free either...

        • by jbolden ( 176878 ) on Sunday November 09, 2014 @03:55AM (#48344033) Homepage

          But they should probably not be introduced before they are completely bug-free -- or at least more bug-free then the thing they will replace.

          Mature software is almost always vastly less buggy than newer feature rich software. In any cycle of improvement the less buggy software is replaced with more feature rich software.

          And considering that the *ix world is full of people who don't like change

          I don't know that. I think there is a some change resistance in Linux now that didn't used to exist. The Unix world used to love change. I think it is a generational shift since the early 2000s. But the Android user base which is the vast majority of the *ix world seems pretty happy with the changes. As do iOS and OSX users. And frankly most Linux desktop users like systemd. And frankly most server people are using cloud solutions which either have or will shortly be switching to systemd easily to take advantage of those features.

          There is a vocal minority what doesn't like this change.

          doesn't solve the problem

          Of course it does solve the problem which means you are just making stuff up.

    • by gmack ( 197796 )

      You do not have to install gnome3 on Debian, I don't. As for systemd, I suggest looking through Debian's extensive documentation detailing why they chose systemd over the alternatives. At any rate the time to argue systemd was last year when Debian had a very lengthily consultation process. I also suggest looking up the systemd documentation for yourself considering the huge amount of FUD being spread about it and I find it telling that neither the Debian fork website nor the boycott systemd websites don

      • by CRCulver ( 715279 ) <crculver@christopherculver.com> on Saturday November 08, 2014 @02:28PM (#48341277) Homepage

        You do not have to install gnome3 on Debian, I don't.

        systemd on Debian is a dependency for most desktop applications even if one avoids Gnome 3. Installing GIMP, for example, will pull in systemd libs.

        As for systemd, I suggest looking through Debian's extensive documentation detailing why they chose systemd over the alternatives.

        During that "lengthly consultation process", nearly all of the for systemd was based on the advantages that systemd, as an init system, offer over competing init systems. In the months since Debian committed to systemd, Poettering has been increasingly vocal that he wants systemd to be more than an init system. That is why there is a renewed call for debate.

        • Sorry, that should have read "...nearly all of the support for systemd was based on the advantages that systemd, as an init system, offered over competing init systems."
        • by gmack ( 197796 )

          If gimp pulls in systemd libs then a bug should be filed there. There is no technical requirement it needs to be that way according to the gnome folks.

          During that "lengthly consultation process", nearly all of the for systemd was based on the advantages that systemd, as an init system, offer over competing init systems. In the months since Debian committed to systemd, Poettering has been increasingly vocal that he wants systemd to be more than an init system. That is why there is a renewed call for debate.

          This is what I mean by reading things for yourself. I've been reading about his plans but you are mistaking the systemd init system with the overall collections of things he is working on. It's not as if the high speed DHCP daemon he has just written will end up in PID 1. His proposals so far is that there will be more optional daemons that either work be

        • by udippel ( 562132 ) on Saturday November 08, 2014 @05:12PM (#48341999)

          Can nobody do anything about this chap on an ego trip?
          First, he didn't do what was necessary for audio; but made a huge, convoluted "Eierlgende Wollmilchsau" from it (I guess, he knows what that is!) that pops up and tells me all the while that I have plugged in some headphone or some; but doesn't remember, ever, despite of all my efforts, that, no, I don't want the internal sound card after each reboot, thank you very much! So I have been telling my machine for the last 2 years, whenever I boot, exactly that, and again. After each reboot. Thank you very much!
          He seems to like all the convoluted stuff - against all Unix philosophy, by the way - and the stuff that usurp the rest of the world. How can a maniac be such unstoppable?

        • by devent ( 1627873 )

          Installing GIMP, for example, will pull in systemd libs.

          Some optional dependency of GIMP pulls systemd-libs. And who cares anyway, if it's just a library? You know that GIMP depends on a bunch of libs one more or one less who cares. A systemd-lib is not systemd.

        • by devent ( 1627873 )

          Poettering has been increasingly vocal that he wants systemd to be more than an init system.

          Who fucking cares? systemd is modular, Debian can just pull in the init stuff of systemd. How is that relevant that the guy who wrote a software peace that Debian wants to use want to add new features?

          • by CRCulver ( 715279 ) <crculver@christopherculver.com> on Saturday November 08, 2014 @05:34PM (#48342097) Homepage

            Who fucking cares? systemd is modular, Debian can just pull in the init stuff of systemd.

            Even the init stuff of systemd requires the Linux kernel, so it is incompatible with Debian's commitment to a diversity of systems. In any event, systemd is not modular by any reasonable definition. All of those "separate binaries" expect to be talking to each other, and the uselessd developer found he had to go far back in the systemd versioning to be able to use just the init system components without the rest.

        • by jbolden ( 176878 )

          I agree. Systemd is now about a "2nd kernel" or "userspace plumbing". Essentially a redesign of Linux.

          The problem is I don't know what there is for Debian to debate. They don't have the upsteam influence. If systemd is expanding and large numbers of developers in upstream and going to be introducing dependencies on systemd what is there for Debian to debate? The most they could in a practical sense do would be to create a subset of packages that don't have systemd dependencies directly or indirectly an

      • by ruir ( 2709173 )
        Before upgrading Debian 7 to 8, pin systemd NOT TO INSTALL. /etc/apt/preferences.d/01systemd Package: systemd Pin: origin "" Pin-Priority: -1
    • by naasking ( 94116 )

      When Debian pushed Gnome3 and the community didn't like it [...] Now there is the systemd debacle. A large number of people have voiced their disapproval [...]

      You seem to be speaking for "the community", but I don't see any hard numbers suggesting that the majority of said community actually shares your opinions. Just because many voices cry out and cry loudly, does not make those voices representative of anything meaningful.

    • I'm thinking that the Debian social contract needs to be replaced with "We do what we want. Like it or don't like it. It doesn't matter to us."
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 08, 2014 @12:50PM (#48340777)

    I've never heard of Debian before - is it based on Ubuntu Linux?

  • by Dr. Evil ( 3501 ) on Saturday November 08, 2014 @01:20PM (#48340923)

    This can be a warning for other groups.

    The Debian constitution looks like nothing more than normal club bureaucracy. Without it, I would expect Debian wouldn't have survived as long as it has.

    https://www.debian.org/devel/constitution [debian.org]

    Without specific concerns about such a constitution, I'm inclined to not make much of this. People change, projects change, people leave, people join. It doesn't matter how vital the participant, things change.

    This is the only hint of what's wrong, I don't see how it has anything to do with the existence of a constitution: https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/11/msg00196.html [debian.org]

    No offense to anyone involved... I'm more interested in learning what's wrong with the constitution so that I can avoid similar problems in my own clubs.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 08, 2014 @02:17PM (#48341239)

      The longest lived linux distribution has no constitution. It's based on the idea of making sure it works well for the leader of the project. Surprisingly, Slackware is gaining, not losing, users due to this.

      Of course, it doesn't hurt that Patrick Volkerding seems to prefer something other than systemd.

      • by gurnec ( 1011007 )

        What are the options, then?

        1. 1. A small handful of individuals who manage to work things out in an amicable way amongst themselves.
        2. 2. A project headed by a benevolent dictator for life (e.g. Slackware).
        3. 3. A governance model that is not dependent on a BDFL, and can scale better than "a small handful of individuals".

        Even though option 2 works well for some projects, it's not always ideal. This doesn't seem to be a problem with a simple solution (and it probably doesn't help that not many techies are great at po

        • no, option 2 only works if the dictator is benevolent - if not, then other options should be chosen.

          Turns out the worst option is democracy, but its also the best compared to all the others.

          Personally, I like the checks and balances of several people who have power over each other in a circle - like a chairman 'owns' the chief executive but otherwise has no power, the ceo 'owns' the product direction, and introduce a third (the users?) who have control over who gets to be chairman. Between them, they are al

  • Yep (Score:3, Funny)

    by Wizy ( 38347 ) <greggatghcNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Saturday November 08, 2014 @01:33PM (#48340981) Journal

    Thanks systemd.

    • Re:Yep (Score:5, Informative)

      by grcumb ( 781340 ) on Saturday November 08, 2014 @04:40PM (#48341859) Homepage Journal

      Thanks systemd.

      BINGO. In spite of Joey being on the 'winning' side of the systemd debate, his resignation seems to be a direct reaction to the schism that systemd has driven into the linux community. As someone far brighter than me [darknedgy.net] said:

      the systemd debate is rarely a technical argument for either side, instead it is an ideological and cultural war waged by two opposing demographics that inhabit the same general sphere of Linux and FOSS. This isn’t about technical merits, it’s about politics.

      Read the whole piece. It's one of the best round-ups of the state of the debate.

      (And by 'debate', I mean 'debacle' of course.)

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 08, 2014 @02:10PM (#48341199)

    I've spent way too much time over the past month reading threads on the developers' list related to Joey's proposed vote. Basically, he was advocating a policy which stated that no package shall be dependent upon one particular init system, the situation which has been in place all along. Unfortunately, what it's really come down to is total commitment to systemd or not, not only for Debian but essentially for the Linux community in general. There are many developers who are modifying packages to totally depend upon systemd and its ever expanding list of services, and they have made it clear that they will not consider alternatives. What's become equally clear to me is that the developers in general, and the systemd proponents in particular, are completely unconcerned about the impact upon the user community, the server segment which has almost no concern for improvements such as reduced boot time, or pretty much anything outside of the development community.

        Perhaps in the long run this will all work out, but as a long-time (17 years) Debian user and longer-time (30 years) UNIX guy, I'm very skeptical. Too many things being aggregated into a single system, too many dependencies upon large packages which are almost certain to prove susceptible to security and reliability defects, and a lead developer with a poor track record, monstrous ego and an alienating personality. At this point, it seems that a fork of Debian is almost inevitable, though that effort appears to me to be more likely to simply dilute the overall effort than bring any resolution.

        What's perhaps most frustrating to me is that systemd is but one of several changes to the ecosystem which are being made with little regard for the consequences. We've seen how well the Gnome3 desktop has been received by the user community, with essentially no concern from the developers. The loss of a desktop manager is an inconvenience, however there are many applications based upon GTK which are essentials, and these are being adversely affected. Another turn in the wrong direction, in my opinion, is Wayland, which breaks many highly useful (to users) capabilities provided by X11. I'd be OK if Wayland continues to be an alternative to X11, however I suspect that, like systemd, it will become an avalanche once Red Hat and any other major distribution adopts it as a default.

        As I wrote above, perhaps in the long run it will all be good, and the consequences of people like Joey Hess departing will not be detrimental. We shall see.

        -- MC --

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by ruir ( 2709173 )
      I have been using Debian since 1996, and *BSD occasionally. Now I am waiting for Monday and FreeBSD 10.1. Will be testing it in the next months. I do not want to reach Debian 9 and having systemd shoved down my throat. Had the unpleasant experience of having to pin systemd to -1 to not having it installed by default when updating a couple of Debian servers to Jessie.
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Burz ( 138833 )

        As a (primarily desktop) Linux user since 1998, the unfolding of this debacle is starting to look like an example of why Linux distros in general lack appeal in the desktop space. Desktop/laptop users can't 'make do' with server architecture; there isn't enough veritcal integration of the powerful features we need. When layers represented by systemd and wayland must be considered swappable, the more talented users turn off to the possiblity of building stable user-facing applications on that platform.

        One bi

      • Is there a good *BSD that has figured out binary package management yet?

        Not that I don't love being able to compile everything from scratch but I've stuck with debian for so long because apt-get "just works".

        I think in 8 years of use I've had a handful of issues with it (or aptitude/dpkg) where as I've had many more with Windows dependencies.

        • I asked a similar question a few weeks back. It seems that FreeBSD's "pkg-ng" still has a few rough edges but is coming along pretty nicely.

        • by ruir ( 2709173 )
          Granted, the greatest advantage of Debian is the excellent package management. But it is not an advantage when it works against our wishes i.e. installing a framework we do not want.
    • by raxx7 ( 205260 ) on Saturday November 08, 2014 @03:27PM (#48341575) Homepage

      Joey Hess did not propose such a vote, Ian Jackson did.
      In fact, Joey Hess endorsed an alternative which basically states "we need no stinking GR".
      https://www.debian.org/vote/2014/vote_003#amendmentproposerc

    • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 08, 2014 @04:15PM (#48341747)

      You outlined your scepticism, thought processes, and the "general concern" standpoint that is so often lost in political vs. technical (or "politechnical") battles involving the "monolithic systemd" approach and I share your sentiments completely. Maybe that's because, like you, I'm an "oldish UNIX guy" (1990 and counting), and a lot of us have been around long enough to see the negative effects of "change for the sake of change" (which, in my opinion, systemd suffers greatly from); a lot of software today suffers from that driving force, so I shouldn't exclusively pick on systemd.

      The author of uselessd said [darknedgy.net] "many of the more technically competent people with views critical of systemd have been rather quiet in public, for some reason". The reason is that most of us in those positions do not have the time, energy, or interest to partake in long-winded uphill battles when our jobs, responsibilities, and lives tend to already be inundated with energy-depleting tasks; the last thing we need is to voluntarily enter into a near-religious debacle when we could just switch distros or flavours (e.g. Linux vs. BSD) and continue to do what we've done for a long time (and continue to do it well). Thus, our scepticism is justified -- we are not "against" change, we just don't make hasty decisions.

    • by udippel ( 562132 )

      Why AC? I would have liked to know who is behind such thoughtful lines.
      And I have no mod points to make myself heard through your words.
      Yours is an insightful and fully seconded message; since what we have been advocating from the early years of GNU onwards, was first and foremost freedom; and secondly modular architectures.
      I have been teaching this to my students throughout the years, and I have poked fun at the 42 levels of dependencies gobbled together in Redmond. Today I'd blush if any of my students ev

    • by steveha ( 103154 ) on Sunday November 09, 2014 @01:05AM (#48343667) Homepage

      Another turn in the wrong direction, in my opinion, is Wayland, which breaks many highly useful (to users) capabilities provided by X11.

      If Keith Packard thinks Wayland is a good idea, I'm inclined to trust him. And, he does. [lwn.net]

      Perhaps you don't fully understand what Wayland is or why the senior X11 developers think it is a good idea. Please read through this and see if it changes your mind:

      http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=x_wayland_situation&num=1 [phoronix.com]

    • by jbolden ( 176878 ) on Sunday November 09, 2014 @04:54AM (#48344163) Homepage

      Joey Hess was pro-systemd. Your entire article is wrong.

  • Whatever (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 08, 2014 @02:13PM (#48341213)

    I don't care what skill you may or may not have, all developers are the same: Random and often wrong.

    I say this as a developer myself for 30+ years. We are esoteric, egotistical, opinionated, and often, very often, wrong when it comes to the overall picture, prediction of future trends, and proper leadership. This is why I always try to seek out leaders that can guide my skill to success. I know for a fact that I suck at understanding the high-level world.

    • Re:Whatever (Score:5, Insightful)

      by organgtool ( 966989 ) on Saturday November 08, 2014 @09:31PM (#48343031)
      Please speak for yourself. We developers are often horrible at recognizing what users want, but we are often excellent at recognizing poorly engineered software and systemd reeks of poor engineering. I'm all for tighter integration of components in the operating system so long as they make sense, but systemd tightly couples all kinds of components that should be optional and, in general, pisses all over basic engineering principles such as KISS. I started out very neutral in the systemd debate, but the more I learn about how it is implemented, the more I understand why there are so many people who vehemently oppose it.
  • by ruir ( 2709173 ) on Saturday November 08, 2014 @02:18PM (#48341241)
    updated to jessie and installed systemd by default, had to roll back VM and pin systemd. Fuck Debian.
  • systemd (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jesdynf ( 42915 ) on Saturday November 08, 2014 @08:08PM (#48342639) Homepage

    systemd is designed to prevent duplicated boilerplate in init scripts -- but it won't support arbitrary verbs in its init scripts so best practice is to put those functions in auxiliary scripts elsewhere. Which will mean you have to duplicate long sets of the same functionality in both places. Yay for systemd!

    systemd is designed to minimize how long you spend booting. Given how often I reboot, if systemd costs me even one more minute to deal with over the course of a year, systemd has actively failed to save me time.

    systemd brings binary logging to Linux, which is good because I was talking to Nobody Ever, and Mr. Ever had a lot to say about how big a help the Windows Event Viewer is in sorting out issues.

    I guess Debian was a great thing to learn Unix on and I'll really miss it.

    • Re:systemd (Score:4, Informative)

      by jbolden ( 176878 ) on Sunday November 09, 2014 @05:26AM (#48344221) Homepage

      systemd is designed to minimize how long you spend booting

      systemd is designed to give Linux a full featured process manager like you have on mainframes. Speeding booting is a side benefit.

      ___

      As for your comment about arbitrary verbs systemd should be handling each process, that's its job. There shouldn't be any functionality in both places after conversion.

    • Re:systemd (Score:4, Informative)

      by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Sunday November 09, 2014 @06:45AM (#48344357)

      Let's number the responses:

      1. For your complaints about lack of arbitrary verbs in init scripts I don't really see much of this as a problem. When systemd's settings do what they are supposed to there is no duplicate functionality elsewhere. This is true for the distros I've seen it used. Far LESS scripting to start the system.

      2. Systemd is not about boot time, actually I saw at least one example showing it's slower than upstart. But if you think that's the reason systemd exists you have a lot of reading to do.

      3. Binary logging is a useful feature IMO. But hey you can't please everyone. Oh wait you can, a single setting change will give you standard syslog compatibility. Who knew!

There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence. -- Jeremy S. Anderson

Working...