Tiny Core Linux

Tiny Core Base => TCB Talk => Topic started by: suare on April 22, 2014, 04:18:13 AM

Title: systemd plans
Post by: suare on April 22, 2014, 04:18:13 AM
Tried to search through forum but found nothing - are there any plans to add systemd into core?
Seems like it will be able to replace bunch of packages at once potentially saving some space and speeding things up. Also it will bring interface on-par with major distros out there.
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: bmarkus on April 22, 2014, 04:34:19 AM
Seems like it will be able to replace bunch of packages at once potentially saving some space and speeding things up. Also it will bring interface on-par with major distros out there.

Which packages you mean? Can you provide figures on space saving and speed gain?

In general, it is not a goal to be on-par with major (?) distros. TC is different specially on the area covered by systemd.

Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: curaga on April 22, 2014, 05:49:19 AM
No, we will not be moving to systemd. It would bring much added size and complexity, and I'm not particularly fond of the politics of that project either.

If you take a look, most of our core packages come from busybox, not separate packages.
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: Juanito on April 22, 2014, 06:06:04 AM
Agreed - somewhat unfortunately even LFS (see svn) appears to have thrown in the towel  :(
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: hiro on April 22, 2014, 11:20:42 AM
this is why i love tinycore :)
thanks again.
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: tinypoodle on April 22, 2014, 02:03:52 PM
Comforting to hear  :D
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: tinypoodle on April 24, 2014, 07:37:28 PM
Seems like it will be able to replace bunch of packages at once potentially saving some space and speeding things up. Also it will bring interface on-par with major distros out there.


Reading suggestion:


http://boycottsystemd.org/
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: bmarkus on April 25, 2014, 01:33:21 AM
Thanks for sharing!
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: yoshi314 on April 29, 2014, 08:29:33 AM
Seems like it will be able to replace bunch of packages at once potentially saving some space and speeding things up. Also it will bring interface on-par with major distros out there.


Reading suggestion:


http://boycottsystemd.org/

FYI most of those claims are invalid, misinformed and some are even outdated (esp that about glibc dependency).

Systemd has its shortcomings, and people are worried about userspace integrating with it, but most of the problems are not solely to blame on systemd.
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: suare on May 05, 2014, 07:00:43 PM
Reading suggestion:

LOL, as if I have not seen enough of this FUD during pathetic whining in ctte ML :)
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: Juanito on May 12, 2014, 07:46:59 AM
'looks like lfs are fixing to ditch systemd after a short trial in svn

..as an aside, most of gnome-3 seems to work on corepure64 without it.
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: hiro on May 14, 2014, 12:52:16 PM
perhaps a bit more tempered arguments:
http://landley.net/notes-2014.html#23-04-2014
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: tinypoodle on May 15, 2014, 02:58:26 AM
Thanks for this link, interesting  :)
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: suare on May 16, 2014, 09:51:18 AM
http://landley.net/notes-2014.html#23-04-2014

Wow, thanks! I have not seen such concentration of FUD and outright lies since MS published get-the-facts.
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: curaga on May 16, 2014, 01:06:11 PM
I'm sure we're all interested in your detailed account on how exactly Landley lies.
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: hiro on May 16, 2014, 03:55:09 PM
i tried to understand what get-the-facts stuff you're talking about, but sadly "the page you requested cannot be found"
the link was cited on wikipedia: http://www.microsoft.com/err/windowsserver/facts/
if you ask me the real facts are: both MS and linux software is a huge complex mess, and tinycore does a nice amount of preselection to keep our heads clear for whatever awful stuff we all need to acchieve with these machines from hell.
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: hiro on May 19, 2014, 07:11:06 AM
Wow, thanks! I have not seen such concentration of FUD and outright lies since MS published get-the-facts.

are you perhaps talking about these crazy attempts of propaganda:
(https://krautchan.net/files/1398563762002.jpg)
? ::)
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: suare on May 30, 2014, 08:13:16 AM
I'm sure we're all interested in your detailed account on how exactly Landley lies.

He claims: blah-blah... Even if you were interested in cloning it (or a compatible subset of it), there's no "it" to clone. No spec, no clear goal... blah-blah...

Debunking this nonsense in trivial. Let me assist you with that:
1. Open browser.
2. Type "google.com"
3. Press enter.
4. Enter is a big key on the right side of keyboard
5. type "systemd api" and press enter again

Most likely the very first thing you'll get is http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/InterfacePortabilityAndStabilityChart/

Now, do you need me to help you learn double-clicking?
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: curaga on May 30, 2014, 09:18:51 AM
That kind of attitude is not welcome here. Once more and you're banned.
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: tinypoodle on May 30, 2014, 09:59:58 AM
double-clicking? seriously now?   ::)
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: bmarkus on May 30, 2014, 10:07:48 AM
Nice:

Quote
Note that not all of these interfaces are our invention (but most), we just adopted them in systemd to make them more prominently implemented. For example, we adopted many Debian facilities in systemd to push it into the other distributions as well.
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: tinypoodle on May 30, 2014, 10:19:27 AM
Giving pushd a whole new meaning   ;D
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: suare on June 08, 2014, 07:55:20 AM
double-clicking? seriously now?   ::)

Well, it's not much harder than googling is it? ;-)
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: suare on June 08, 2014, 08:12:02 AM
Precisely!

But with some efforts one can pretend that he've never heard of those interfaces and that nothing is documented in systemd. All it takes is some ignorance and inability to google. Landley succeeded in that endeavour - others might follow that road as well.

It doesn't change the facts though :-)
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: bmarkus on July 16, 2014, 05:22:53 AM
Just playing with CentOS7 and see, Red Hat moved to systemd. Wether I like it or not, I must use....
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: hiro on July 16, 2014, 07:10:28 AM
Oh, no worries, from Red Hat you can always expect the worse.
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: bmarkus on July 16, 2014, 11:16:04 AM
Oh, no worries, from Red Hat you can always expect the worse.

It is not true. RHEL is stable, reliable platform and now release 7 comes with nice features as well as finally they have recent packages, like Python 2.7.5, Apache httpd 2.4, Tomcat 7, dropped MySQL on favour of MariaDB, etc. In corporate environment usually RHEL is the only accepted LINUX platform. We are using 6.x without any issues, except, except lack of recent packages, see above. But with 7 it is gone.

CentOS now follows RHEL much faster then before as key developers are payed full time by REDHAT since January.

For me the problem now is only systemd, as setting up the system is changed and I have to relearn ho to manage the system which is wasting a time. But this is the life. Everything is changing.
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: jls on October 21, 2014, 02:55:00 AM
http://www.debianfork.org/ (http://www.debianfork.org/)
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: core-user on November 12, 2014, 10:37:28 AM
I think systemd is OK for big distros but it is too big in itself for using on light weight distros such as this (& others that I use/like), hopefully sense will prevail, & we will not lose the unix philosophy of small programs integrating to create a system.
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: bmarkus on November 12, 2014, 10:59:56 AM
I think systemd is OK for big distros but it is too big in itself for using on light weight distros such as this (& others that I use/like), hopefully sense will prevail, & we will not lose the unix philosophy of small programs integrating to create a system.

It is not about size.
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: core-user on November 12, 2014, 01:02:40 PM
I think systemd is OK for big distros but it is too big in itself for using on light weight distros such as this (& others that I use/like), hopefully sense will prevail, & we will not lose the unix philosophy of small programs integrating to create a system.

It is not about size.
From what I understand, from the discussions that I have read, it is the intention that it will be a monolithic booting device, with userland programs depending on parts of it. That I do not like.
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: suare on May 14, 2015, 11:08:31 AM
From what I understand

From what you've misunderstood.

from the discussions that I have read

Have you ever considered reading manual for the software or, better yet, it's configuration files and source code instead of rants of some pathetic trolls over the Internet? Seriously, with widespread availability of virtualization solution and with all the major distribution switched to systemd it actually takes couple of minutes to get your hand on a full-fledged system booted and managed via systemd. All that and excellent documentation, hell even video tutorials available! - makes me think that it takes considerable efforts to stay ignorant.

it is the intention that it will be a monolithic booting device, with userland programs depending on parts of it. That I do not like.

I've heard they have discounts on tinfoil hats this months - you should rush to get one. Hopefully it will shield you from evil conspiracy of "monolithic booting device" which in reality of sane people actually consists of dozens of modules with well-documented stable interfaces which are btw actively used by developers of various GNU/Linux distros to provided the replacement for components as they please.
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: bmarkus on May 14, 2015, 11:15:54 AM
suare: what is your point?
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: hiro on May 14, 2015, 11:54:45 AM
are you trying to say tinycore needs more video tutorials for people like you to understand it's concepts?
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: curaga on May 14, 2015, 01:33:57 PM
Coming back to a seven-month old thread just to troll? Seriously?
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: jls on May 14, 2015, 05:41:43 PM
http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page (http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page)
http://www.firenze.linux.it/2015/05/systemd/ (http://www.firenze.linux.it/2015/05/systemd/)
Title: Re: systemd plans
Post by: suare on May 15, 2015, 04:15:11 PM
suare: what is your point?

Making opinion about open source technology using internet rants instead of documentation and experimentation is equivalent of clinical retardation.