Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 37

Thread: Ubuntu Plans To Move To Systemd's Logind

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by newwen View Post
    I hope they admit defeat and adopt systemd someday.
    There is a difference between systemd and the systemd tree.

    Systemd = init+friends
    Systemd tree = coreOS including sysd, udev, bootchart, your mum, and hopefully other future stuff.

    While systemd is brilliant work on its own, systemd tree is our best hope to do away with CLA and crazy horse shit like Mir et al.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,601

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nukem View Post
    I recently switch from OpenRC to systemd on my Gentoo system and the difference is incredible.
    Pretty much my experience as well. It's a bit annoying how many packages don't come with systemd unit files, but other than that, systemd is super powerful and easy to use at the same time. I don't know how people lived without journalctl. And having everything related to system startup managed by systemd just makes a lot of sense. Who needs pm-utils and separate reboot/shutdown etc. executables? It's just natural to make use of all that via systemctl poweroff/suspend/hibernate etc. Automatic network initialisation is a real time-saver. An intelligent way of creating directories at runtime (in /run and all) is also very much appreciated. Plus things like syslog and cron are no longer needed.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    474

    Default

    Modularity for the win!

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by plonoma View Post
    Modularity for the win!
    What you really are saying: the trade-offs from modularity ftw. Besides the increased maintenance your are cheering for CLA and the shit pulled by Canonical.

    FUCK FRAGMENTATION
    Last edited by funkSTAR; 03-07-2013 at 07:27 AM.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Sunshine State
    Posts
    307

    Default

    Hopefully this happens with Mir soon. My (ever declining) respect for Canonical would be greatly increased if they showed a willingness to admit mistakes and collaborate for the sake of the community.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,032

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    What you really are saying: the trade-offs from modularity ftw. Besides the increased maintenance your are cheering for CLA and the shit pulled by Canonical.

    FUCK FRAGMENTATION
    Actually funky, he's praising systemd and Canonical is showing here that those complaints about systemd being monolithic as opposed to modular were dead wrong. Also a Modular program is far superior to an equivalent monolithic program as a modular program is essentially a wrapper around a bunch of far smaller programs (which means far less maintenance burden although larger initial development burden) that are doing one or a small number of things and it being a bunch of small programs means we can test them far easier because we're able to shove sample data in at the component level and get results back and see if they're what we expect them to be. Also say someone comes up with something better than logind, well you've got a relatively easy time just switching things out, Also what if someone wants to use some of your standardized components but not all of them? Well instead of having to rewrite an equivalent component themselves (thus leading to more fragmentation) they just have to set things up so that they're using your standardized components (thus leading to less fragmentation). A monolithic application on the other hand is quite the opposite, it's a pain to replace, good luck with testing and you're forcing people to have to write their own components. You will also note that over the long run modular programs win out over monolithic ones, systemd replacing sysV is a perfect example of this, although it's but one of many success stories.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    684

    Default

    I don't understand why they are trying to bolt on a bunch of systemd pieces into upstart, instead of just switching to systemd, which is obviously superior.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
    Actually funky, he's praising systemd and Canonical is showing here that those complaints about systemd being monolithic as opposed to modular were dead wrong. Also a Modular program is far superior to an equivalent monolithic program as a modular program is essentially a wrapper around a bunch of far smaller programs (which means far less maintenance burden although larger initial development burden) that are doing one or a small number of things and it being a bunch of small programs means we can test them far easier because we're able to shove sample data in at the component level and get results back and see if they're what we expect them to be. Also say someone comes up with something better than logind, well you've got a relatively easy time just switching things out, Also what if someone wants to use some of your standardized components but not all of them? Well instead of having to rewrite an equivalent component themselves (thus leading to more fragmentation) they just have to set things up so that they're using your standardized components (thus leading to less fragmentation). A monolithic application on the other hand is quite the opposite, it's a pain to replace, good luck with testing and you're forcing people to have to write their own components. You will also note that over the long run modular programs win out over monolithic ones, systemd replacing sysV is a perfect example of this, although it's but one of many success stories.
    Come on. You cant make such an assessment without looking at advantages/disadvantages. And the primary DISADVANTAGE these days are fragmentation like Canonicals complete fuck up. Demanding the developers provide the many extra hours of release management and testing to make separate versions of every modules is waste of time. And Canonical takes advantage of this situation and ships CLAed replacements all the time. THAT is helping fragmentation. If Canonical wants to fragment THEY should have the burden not everyone else.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bwat47 View Post
    I don't understand why they are trying to bolt on a bunch of systemd pieces into upstart, instead of just switching to systemd, which is obviously superior.
    Control&CLA

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,032

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    Come on. You cant make such an assessment without looking at advantages/disadvantages. And the primary DISADVANTAGE these days are fragmentation like Canonicals complete fuck up. Demanding the developers provide the many extra hours of release management and testing to make separate versions of every modules is waste of time. And Canonical takes advantage of this situation and ships CLAed replacements all the time. THAT is helping fragmentation. If Canonical wants to fragment THEY should have the burden not everyone else.
    While I agree that their fragmentation should be their problem, just because things are designed as modules doesn't mean that having people using them in their systems inherently places more maintenance demands upon the people writing the modules, and in fact being modularized helps the initial developer because it makes it easier to maintain through testing capability that it opens up and otherwise. Also just because a person is using it doesn't mean that the module developers have to cater to that person, they can like Martin (the Kwin Developer) say "We're not going to take your patches that support only you", thus forcing the individual to take care of their own fragments with rebasing them and such.

Posting Permissions

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