Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 71

Thread: Upstart Now Available In Debian Unstable

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    98

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernard Swiss View Post
    I'm probably speaking beyond my competence, here, but here goes:
    I'm also incompetent, but nevertheless I've been successfully managing my own LFS installation since 1999, and I wholeheartedly agree to every word that you've said.

    Upstart developers not having a messianic stance to have everyone in the world use their product is also a plus.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LightBit View Post
    Unix-like OS-es never had problem spawning many processes and socket activation doesn't belong to init. If it's so simple, reimplement it in one month or even better make it POSIX.
    Wow. First systemd is bashed for being too complex, and now "UNIX" is immune to any complexity. This keeps getting better and better. What makes "UNIX" magic? Nothing. It is a now-dead 70s OS implementation(for a reason)!

    One of the reasons Linux is getting its ass kicked is the abysmal kernel support for stuff that desktop user cares about; A kernel layer and init that just dont fuck up. The only way to keep it managable is keeping it fucking simple and enable a sane level of debugging. Systemd does that. There is no need to spawn shit about UNIX or POSIX compliance. users dont care.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    The only way to keep it managable is keeping it fucking simple and enable a sane level of debugging. Systemd does that.
    And just to show how it is done. Canonicals skunkwork shit is nowhere near this level of achievement. Because they dont care unless it benefits Canonical. The same goes for the kernel.
    https://plus.google.com/108087225644...ts/3AprGbCTfpS

    Userland is stil uncharted land. Now Canonical starts blabbering about user session management in Upstart. Well maybe those guys should help fix the kernel layer first. THEY CHOSE NOT TO BECAUSE THEY DONT CARE. Now they want a piece of user land following their session stuff while the systemd guys have been holding back for at least 1 year because no hard systemd deps could be accepted by Canonical. Waiting one year on Canonical, and now they are on the verge to add user land deps on Upstart. How ridiculous!
    Last edited by funkSTAR; 12-01-2012 at 07:23 AM.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    Wow. First systemd is bashed for being too complex, and now "UNIX" is immune to any complexity. This keeps getting better and better. What makes "UNIX" magic? Nothing. It is a now-dead 70s OS implementation(for a reason)!
    So if you put everything into one process, like COMMAND.COM, it becomes simpler?
    fork() is cheap and I said unix-like, not AT&T Bell Labs UNIX.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    And just to show how it is done. Canonicals skunkwork shit is nowhere near this level of achievement. Because they dont care unless it benefits Canonical. The same goes for the kernel.
    https://plus.google.com/108087225644...ts/3AprGbCTfpS
    Same as Red Hat's systemd.


    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    Userland is stil uncharted land. Now Canonical starts blabbering about user session management in Upstart. Well maybe those guys should help fix the kernel layer first. THEY CHOSE NOT TO BECAUSE THEY DONT CARE.
    Same as systemd does't care about POSIX.


    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    Now they want a piece of user land following their session stuff while the systemd guys have been holding back for at least 1 year because no hard systemd deps could be accepted by Canonical. Waiting one year on Canonical, and now they are on the verge to add user land deps on Upstart. How ridiculous!
    Great for sysvinit, because no one can add hard deps to userland.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Are we real?
    Posts
    26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LightBit View Post
    So if you put everything into one process, like COMMAND.COM, it becomes simpler?
    systemd package contains the code for many different programs (including udev). The init daemon (/usr/lib/systemd/systemd) for version 196 is 888 kB size.

    When everything is compiled you get these binaries:

    hostnamectl
    journalctl
    localectl
    loginctl
    systemctl
    systemd-analyze
    systemd-ask-password
    systemd-cat
    systemd-cgls
    systemd-cgtop
    systemd-coredumpctl
    systemd-delta
    systemd-detect-virt
    systemd-inhibit
    systemd-machine-id-setup
    systemd-notify
    systemd-nspawn
    systemd-stdio-bridge
    systemd-tmpfiles
    systemd-tty-ask-password-agent
    timedatectl
    udevadm
    udevd

    Which are normally located in the /usr/bin/ directory. So you see, systemd is not like COMMAND.COM

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Are we real?
    Posts
    26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LightBit View Post
    Same as systemd does't care about POSIX.
    systemd is a system and service manager for Linux, not for POSIX operating systems. If other UNIX-like operating systems want systemd, the need to port cgroups (which is in Linux since 2007).

    If you don't like it... you know... don't use it.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by siban View Post
    systemd package contains the code for many different programs (including udev).
    The init daemon (/usr/lib/systemd/systemd) for version 196 is 888 kB size.
    Is this supposed to be small?!
    init should be less than 10kB statically linked to some bloat free library.

    Quote Originally Posted by siban View Post
    When everything is compiled you get these binaries:

    hostnamectl
    journalctl
    localectl
    loginctl
    systemctl
    systemd-analyze
    systemd-ask-password
    systemd-cat
    systemd-cgls
    systemd-cgtop
    systemd-coredumpctl
    systemd-delta
    systemd-detect-virt
    systemd-inhibit
    systemd-machine-id-setup
    systemd-notify
    systemd-nspawn
    systemd-stdio-bridge
    systemd-tmpfiles
    systemd-tty-ask-password-agent
    timedatectl
    udevadm
    udevd

    Which are normally located in the /usr/bin/ directory. So you see, systemd is not like COMMAND.COM
    See what is inside core (pid 1): http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/.../tree/src/core

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,049

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by siban View Post
    systemd package contains the code for many different programs (including udev). The init daemon (/usr/lib/systemd/systemd) for version 196 is 888 kB size.
    ...
    So you see, systemd is not like COMMAND.COM
    888 kb !

    You're making my, and his, point for us. That is _huge_. That's 850kb of code, all unnecessary, there to increase the chance of bugs disrupting the only task init should do.

    My sysvinit is ~32kb, and that is a bit too big too.


    So yes, that is exactly like command.com despite systemd having some commands split off.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by siban View Post
    systemd is a system and service manager for Linux, not for POSIX operating systems. If other UNIX-like operating systems want systemd, the need to port cgroups (which is in Linux since 2007).
    I don't know if any other UNIX-like operating system wants systemd. Maybe FreeBSD?
    It' actually great that systemd isn't portable.

    Quote Originally Posted by siban View Post
    If you don't like it... you know... don't use it.
    No systemd, no Gnome.
    No systemd, no udev.
    ...
    No systemd, no Linux.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •