Debian is compromised, escape the systemd cancer.
Try distros like Devuan. All you need from debian without the cuckery.
https://devuan.org/
Reminder that Devuan repositories are currently loaded with requests.
WE MORE NEED MIRRORS!
>>54656065
Just install gentoo.
>>54656065
first tell me why systemd is bad
why systemd is bad u fuck tard
>>54657484
“Systemd flies in the face of the Unix philosophy: ‘do one thing and do it well,’ representing a complex collection of dozens of tightly coupled binaries. Its responsibilities grossly exceed that of an init system, as it goes on to handle power management, device management, mount points, cron, disk encryption, socket API/inetd, syslog, network configuration, login/session management, readahead, GPT partition discovery, container registration, hostname/locale/time management, mDNS/DNS-SD, the Linux console and other things all wrapped into one.”
>>54657484
>>54657474
poettering pls go
>>54657474
>>54657484
http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_systemd#Breaking_promises_and_immaturity
>>54657474
>>54657484
I refuse to post (yet again) all the info on systemd.
If you want to troll, go to thell.
>>54657556
So your argument isn't that it's bad at doing any of those things, it's that it does too many things well?
The more I learn about using systemd the more I get the feeling that people are sperging out over nothing. What's weird is it offers backwards compatibility with the systems it replaces. So if you want to pretend your system is running cron, you can do that. If you want to boot in to an init level instead of a .target it will humor you. If you want to mount something with fstab nothing's stopping you.
>>54657672
>it's that it does too many things well?
WRONG. At the beginning it was a shitty init, and now is a growing tumor.
Many things became "deprecated" just because. No reason at all other than "systemD wanted to obfuscate the interface".
And for the human factor, I don't trust Poettering or Red Hat.
>>54657730
are u dumb??
>>54657738
quit shiling asshole, this isn't buying you a sandwich
>>54657748
what?? do you know how to grammar?
>>54656065
>implying living is easy nowadays
>implying a computer cannot threaten your life
>>54657730
The interface isn't obfuscated though. It's pretty simple. If you like the old interface it hasn't gone anywhere.
Things didn't become deprecated because systemd was created. Things became deprecated because distros started using it. This is what happens when a superior option comes along.
>>54657907
>interface isn't obfuscated
>superior option comes along
Why you lie? If systemD started replacing shit like udev, and now su !
Distros started adopting this cancer and everything came to hell.
No wonder people suspect of this being a ruse by the NSA, shills always come in the defense with lies and shitty excuses.
>>54656065
No, thanks. That is a non-issue for me, and if it is a problem for you, that means you're a cuck. I rarely even use Linux at all. It sucks. Most of the time I just use FreeBSD or OpenBSD. In the rare occasion I need to use Linux, I use Alpine.
Systemd is going to be the next xorg
>>54657574
>>54657610
>>54657639
>No one actually explains why systemd is bad
>>54658600
As I understand the argument linux needs some of the functionality that systemd offers, however people are deeply distrustful of the way it is being controlled and the obfuscation and overarching intrusive control that seems to be inherent within the organisation behind it.
>>54658600
See
>>54657556
>>54657610
>>54657730
>>54658747
Is not like that, systemd replaced other software that gave functionality, things didn't needed to replace.
And is not mission creep, the API is obfuscated in such a way you need to have a lot of time and joint effort to watch over what Red Hat's team is doing.
And you can't take back the pieces from systemd to use it in other projects an distros that don't use systemd.
Red Hat brought distrust upon itself.
>>54658747
>however people are deeply distrustful
in other words, they are a bunch of retards incapable of checking an open source project
>>54659199
You are a bigot. A project that big needs a team to check they do what they say.
Are you sure you are not related to them?
>>54657556
>Systemd flies in the face of the Unix philosophy: ‘do one thing and do it well
you mean just like any of the BSDs? because they too have everything in one repo, designed to work all together; are you actually fucking retarded?
>>54657672
>it's that it does too many things well?
No, it's that it doesn't do all things well and due to how its structured those things are impossible to replace without throwing the whole systemd out altogether
>>54656065
Newest Devuan installer is trash.
This netinstaller is trash:
http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
I don't mind forks like this but if you flee GNU/Linux looking for something that doesn't force you to conform to standards and move to one of the BSDs you're a fucking idiot.
>>54659215
Are you getting paid to insult people? You give no argument and truly sperg nonsensical words.
>>54657955
>Distros started adopting
because it's superior to anything else out there
>a ruse by the NSA
oh, you're mentally ill, carry on
Systemd is amazing and I posit that you are mad, your arguments are nonsense, and I boot in 8 seconds to Xorg.
>>54659215
You should tell me, judging by your post you're some kind of a retardation expert.
>>54659248
>I'll pretend I only read the last question
>I am actually retarded
ok then
Oh, I get it.
Shills are pushing BSD.
>>54659257
You got told, eh?
Just move to FreeBSD.
>>54659274
Is it true that BSD is against the UNIX philosophy?
>>54659276
I'm still busy deciphering how your reply was related to the greentext above it
>>54659293
>I'm too stupid to read simple phrases
:^)
>>54659288
I am more concern how their developers are bigots against the GNU project.
>>54656065
>Devuan
bwahahahaha, that shit show by the "veteran unix users"? bwahahahaha
>>54659288
BSDs try to conform to the Unix philosophy where possible. They're basically modern Unix systems but legally they're not allowed to call themselves that.
>>54659312
Yes, sure, but are the BSDs against the UNIX philosophy? (In your opinion, of course)
Stop shilling BSD.
Stop lying about nothing being wrong with systemD.
FUCK OFF.
>>54659312
And how is that a bad thing? GNU sucks.
Reminder that BSD and the BSD license is promoted by big corporations to cuck developers.
>>54659312
All three of them.
>>54659196
>Is not like that, systemd replaced other software that gave functionality, things didn't needed to replace.
dae hate natural selection?
>>54657474
>why systemd is bad
A stop job is running for Session c1 user abc
>>54659357
Reminder that that's literally a non-issue Lincucks invented as a red herring because they couldn't come up with a single technical argument against BSD, but in reality BSD-style licenses are not and have never been a problem, and even Lincucks use a lot of BSD-style licensed stuff (X11, PHP, Python, Apache, PostgreSQL, Perl, LaTeX, OpenSSL, etc. etc. etc...)
>>54656065
SystemD is the future, and moreover it merely represents the maturing of the GNU/Linux operating system beyond the days of ad-hoc bash scripts. Yes, they were flexible, but Linux has always missed having a shared underlying API with which to universally interact with the system (short of directly interfacing with the kernel, which opens up numerous problems with security and stability). SystemD may centralize things, yes, but that added layer of abstraction can in time lead to better consistency across platforms and applications as well as bettered security through modifying the kernel and SystemD to interface more exclusively while limiting surface area available to user-space.
I'm really hoping that in the next few years, the widespread adoption of technically superior and more maturely designed solutions like SystemD and Wayland will lead to the ability to interface with the Linux via a Powershell-style object-oriented CLI. While bash and other scripting languages gave GNU/Linux an edge for many years when faced up against the CLI capabilities of Microsoft operating systems, the maturation of Powershell has changed that balance dramatically, and makes the manual string-parsing and DIY application-chaining of GNU/Linux look rather juvenile. Microsoft has gone above and beyond in their development of DSC, of their Linux compatibility layer, of docker-style container support, powershell's ssh, etc. You can essentially run every command and get standardized object types which you can effortlessly pass into other commands, with rich support for display methods of those objects, and direct access to modifying the system at fundamental levels (such as you get when leveraging the Puppet-style DSC now available in Powershell). When GNU/Linux reaches adulthood and starts moving toward those superior Microsoft features, the entire cloud ecosystem will become radically better integrated and adoption rates will rise among smaller players.
>>54656065
>devuan
>debian
NO, FAGGOT! INSTALL FUNTOO OR GENTOO!
>>54659327
What? Surely they "fly in the face of UNIX philosophy"! Haven't you seen all the code in a single repository? And only certain people have commit access, not any contributor! It's literally just like systemd! Aren't you concerned about this? That BSDs don't follow the UNIX way? In other words, that UNIX doesn't follow the UNIX way? If not, how do you deal with that cognitive dissonance?
>>54659377
artificial selection breed this tumor called systemd, get rekt
>>54659357
>big corporations
Wanna know how I know you're a gommie?
>>54659392
enjoy your 4 hour compiles that crash halfway through because your computer doesn't have enough RAM
>>54659404
Wanna know how I know you are against small entrepreneurs?
>install this distribution without systemd
Why is it bad
>GTFO troll cuck boy
>>54659415
I AM a small entrepreneur, you cocksucker.
>>54659401
It's a dog eat dog world, anon. And Poettering the fucking Chinamen.
This isn't going well with trolls.
They don't care for reasoning, even when presented with evidence they still keep trolling.
>cocksucker
>fucking idiot
>retarded
REPORT THESE SHILLS
>>54659415
The GPL harms small entrepreneurs. Big companies love the GPL. Look at Oracle, Google, Apple. All of them own massive amounts of GPL'ed code. Massive corporations can afford to buy out GPL projects. Once they own the copyrights, they can relicense it under their own proprietary license, while keeping a watered-down version GPL'ed. Once the code is GPL'ed, BSD projects can't use it.
Corporations don't steal BSD code. They give a lot back to BSD-licensed projects actually. Linux developers steal BSD code. And big corporations can make BSD code proprietary too... but so can small ones, because they don't have to buy the rights out. Therefore, it levels the playing field.
>>54659414
>2016
>don't have 16GB
Poo in the Loo!
>>54659460
>Oracle
You mean the same corporation known to rage against GPL projects? To buy open source projects and then close source them?
>>54659425
Tawmpy Tears?
>>54659390
For fuck's sake Lennart, please GO!
>>54659460
This. You'd never have small enterprises like Calyptix, Halon and Vantronix making great appliances which are able to compete against the big ones without BSD.
Plus, BSD code improves the whole ecosystem security-wise. Just look at stuff like arc4random, it's literally everywhere these days.
The Internet is a safer place thanks literally to BSD.
>>54659460
>Linux developers steal BSD code
How so?
>And big corporations can make BSD code proprietary too
So, they're stealing?
>Corporations don't steal BSD code
Make up your mind!
>>54657574
is that a urinal cake?
>>54659480
The same one who owns MySQL, VirtualBox, and other GPL projects. They love the GPL.
>apple steals freebsd
>freebsd is now dead
>google steals linux
>google is now one of the largest contributors to linux
how's that working out for you bsdfriends?
>BSD is against the UNIX way
"devuan" cucks actually believe this?
>>54657556
>Unix philosophy
Linux isn't Unix.You're looking for the Macfag general,I think.
>>54659506
>How so?
By wrapping the GPL around it. Happens all the time. They CAN'T do it, the license doesn't allow that, but they get away with it because they can afford big attorneys like big fat Eben Moglen, who even himself admitted they can't do that, but restrained himself to only "warn" them they should stop doing it (which they didn't).
>So, they're stealing?
No. They're obeying the license. Because they have actually got something to lose. AKA business. The Linux Foundation and the Free Software Foundation are non-profits.
>Make up your mind!
You're dumb and you're arguing about a subject you have no knowledge of. There can't be debate between both of us. Maybe lesson. I can teach you. But not argue with you.
>>54657484
>>54657672
>>54657738
>>54657806
>>54657907
>>54658456
>>54658600
>>54659199
>>54659215
>>54659247
>>54659253
>>54659264
>>54659287
>>54659338
>>54659377
>>54659388
>>54659390
>>54659404
>>54659417
>>54659425
>>54659433
>>54659460
>>54659468
>>54659501
TELEMARKETERS GET OUT
We know you are here.
https://rbt.asia/g/thread/54597043
ITT: deluded idiots that can't put together a coherent thought are celebrating their mental illness by rallying up against a random free software project.
>>54659526
>apple steals freebsd
lol wut?
>freebsd is now dead
lolno
>>54659546
>I can excuse myself from following established best practices, standards and conventions if I just claim I never intended to in the first place
Literal equivalent of being retarded on purpose.
>>54659572
god damn I hate bsd so much
>>54659572
there are people in the free software community who want it both ways; they want people to have open source software and approve of permissive licenses as long as nobody actually takes advantage of the permissive licensing and creates a closed source fork from the open source origin.
generally it's agreed that os x is heavily inspired and partly built out of freebsd, but it's a spiritual descendent at this point.
>>54659558
>By wrapping the GPL around it.
Are you referring to derivative works?
>No. They're obeying the license.
Aren't they also wrapping their EULA around it? Didn't you say they can't do that?
>I can teach you.
Go ahead, but you didn't have such a great start; are you sure everything is clear in your own head before you try to explain it?
>>54659526
Wow, the GNU/Linux side of this argument is completely based upon ignorance.
In first place, FreeBSD isn't dead. It's literally one of the most used operating systems in the world.
Secondly, Apple didn't steal FreeBSD. Only the userland and the libc on Mac OS X derive from FreeBSD code. Most of the operating system has nothing to do with FreeBSD.
Finally, Apple did contribute and still contributes a LOT of code back to FreeBSD, including a whole C++ stack and compiler.
You can't have a healthy debate when one side of the argument is simply so ignorant.
>>54659605
how about the PS4 OS?
>>54659605
Darwin took a lot of developer thou. You can bet they went from bsd to darwin.
>>54659583
>if I just claim I never intended to in the first place
Show me something in the Linux mission statement that claims Linux wants to be Unix.You're just spouting Greybeard memery.
>>54659619
>inally, Apple did contribute and still contributes a LOT of code back to FreeBSD, including a whole C++ stack and compiler.
haha, oh wow.
>>54659619
>literally one of the most used
>behind Windows, OSX, iOS, Android, GNU/Linux, etc.
ok
>>54659611
I said I CAN, not that I WILL. I have better ways to spend my time, and I'm not your personal search engine. Read up on it, you dumbass. Here's a link, this is more than you deserve.
http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20070913014315
>>54659624
that's true. i guess my gripe is that the OSS community has these shrill zealots who don't seem to appreciate that freedom means freedom to do shitty things as well. i don't like that OS X is closed source, but that's up to them.
it's undeniably true that OS X suffers from bash and other projects going GPLv3, forcing OS X to ship the last versions of those components that used a more permissive license. non-permissive licensing seems to be against the very general spirit of freedom, and it seems like the justification for it is that it's okay to handcuff you if you do it with the lights on.
>>54659658
>2007
Something relevant please?
That was back when people were still using BSD.
>>54659641
... what's the relevancy of that? You're either confused or moving the goalposts.
>muh sysvinit
>muh minimalism
>>54659658
>I have better ways to spend my time
Ah, backpedaling, I heard of this tactic used by people that get cornered in an argument and try to save face. So... you were actually full of shit. Figures.
>>54659650
Of that list, the only one that's used on servers and appliances is Linux. Nobody cares about user-facing shit. Why didn't you also include crap like ChromeOS in your list? Are you sure you're on /g/, not on /v/?
>>54659686
Backpedaling is when you take something away, you idiot. I stand by 100% of what I said. I'm 100% right and don't care about your red herring debate techniques. Anyone that looks this up will find out. I literally don't care about the idiots in this forum who choose to be ignorants and listen to your shit and go to your side. The truth is the truth is the truth. No matter how many people believe in it or not.
>>54659670
2/10, I actually believe for a moment you weren't trolling
>>54659667
Take it like this. Would you prefer to be left no permissions to rewrite the code over a project, meaning, having you project go closed source, or signing a contract that says whatever you do you have to let other people do it too?
Apple should embrace the GPL, but guess what? They are prefer to keep everything closed, even being called even from other big companies.
>>54659691
>Nobody cares about user-facing shit
correction: freebsd devs don't care because they're apple shills anyway and must use OSX
>Why didn't you also include crap like ChromeOS
forgot about it; yes, ChromeOS is more popular than freebsd
>>54659726
Shit you caught me.
BSD was already dead in 2007 people weren't using it :(
>>54659667
Amazing how you can mention OSX and bash in the same sentence and make it sound like bash is the one that goes against the spirit of freedom.
>>54659732
Isn't chromeos even more popular than osx nowadays?
>>54659732
>correction: freebsd devs don't care because they're apple shills anyway and must use OSX
Nice meme, but no we aren't. I'm a FreeBSD dev and I know FreeBSD devs in person and none of us use Macs. We develop on many architectures, actually, and some of us do have some Macs for testing, but not as our primary platform. I don't have an iPhone or any shit like that.
The reason we don't care is because let the KDE or GNOME devs do it. We have our interests like any human beings, and they are about caching algorithms and file-system implementations, not colourful GUIs. Stay buttmad about it.
>>54659734
Was this supposed to be funny or just a stupid attempt to taunt me?
>>54659762
Let me help you by quoting:
The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0).
The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).
The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
While I have no issue with systemd, Devuan's website is fucking mint. It's clean and a lot better than Debian's.
>>54659563
>look mom, i'm retard.
>>54659675
>what's the relevancy of that?
Nobody ever claimed to be Unix or wanting to be Unix.Linux is not your surrogate to your dead operating system,old man.The rest of us have learned from your mistakes.If you want to flounder in a dead playland,may I suggest Plan9?
How does someone forking a BSD licensed project and making their fork closed source = the original project becomes closed source?
I've never really understood the GPL zealot part of this internet fight.
>>54659803
>have learned from your mistakes
>create and use systemd
kek
>>54659805
>zealot
Nice bias. Too bad you don't care for a real answer.
>>54659825
No I really do care for one. Do you have one?
>>54659805
If you copyright an algorithm and after a while people need to use it to make the whole project functional, you effectively extinguished the original open source project.
>>54659805
It doesn't. It doesn't even mean the fork isn't free. The license doesn't allow you to do that. Read it. That's the part GNUtards don't get. That's why Lincucks thought they could wrap a GPL around BSD code, remove the BSD notice and move along as if nothing had happened.
The license actually just lets you distribute the binaries without the source... but those binaries are still under the BSD license! You could disassemble them and use the resulting code with no worries (as long as you keep the fucking notice!).
>>54659825
Nice way of avoiding the question, you troll.
All your side has done thus far is employ debate techniques. Only our side has given actual arguments.
>>54659726
>I stand by 100% of what I said.
What you said doesn't make any sense. You're incoherent, anon.
>literally don't care
You obviously do, you wouldn't waste time posting otherwise. It's just that you lack the mental development to have a meaningful conversation: you just spew ignorant drivel you've heard before without using your brain filter to actually make sense and when you're asked for details you back off invoking "I don't have time".
Ok then, looks like we're done here, you can relax now without having to reply anymore, I won't try to reason with an obvious retard anymore. And you have the audacity to claim that you can "teach"? Please, a mouthbreather like you surely has problems even walking straight.
>The truth is the truth is the truth
That's your way of saying: T-T-T-TIMMEH!
>>54659866
See >>54659849
STOP INSULTING
>>54659727
>Take it like this. Would you prefer to be left no permissions to rewrite the code over a project, meaning, having you project go closed source, or signing a contract that says whatever you do you have to let other people do it too?
My objection is with this false dichotomy. I don't like the notion of my hands being tied regarding what I can do with my software in either direction.
Permissive licenses strike a more reasonable balance. Without needing to provide a proof for it, I accept that some companies need to (or just decide to) keep some of their code private. Permissive licenses advocate for open source, but afford enough oxygen in the room for the status quo up till now to co-exist.
GPLv3 says no to that, and tries to create its own world without any of the cultural or technical affordances in the status quo. GPLv3 decides not to co-exist with the world that came before it. The problem is that the world that came before it is surprisingly hard to unseat, so trying to *live* a completely GPLv3 life is either intensely broken or fundamentally impossible, depending on how ardently you take it.
>>54659805
Thats besides the point. The software is proprietary and closed source and the enemy of your freedoms.
Its ethically wrong.
>>54659783
>and none of us use Macs
I guess you're the kind of developer that doesn't go to FreeBSD conferences (ie. the kind that's irrelevant). Because everyone there is using macs.
>>54659813
So,you're implying Unix was bloated and unruly?
>>54659849
>copyright an algorithm
Are you really dumb or just pretending to be?
>>54659880
Are you samefag or do you actually believe that as well?
Just FYI: you can't copyright an algorithm. Look it up.
Once again, the GNU/Linux side of things is based on ignorance.
>>54659873
>What you said doesn't make any sense.
I already said so: look it up. You'll see what I said is true. Or don't, and stay ignorant.
You're literally projecting. I'm done with you.
>>54659907
>no u
the level of bsd shits, everyone
>>54659902
You've never used Unix, have you?
GNU/Linux users are teenagers. No surprise here, I guess...
>>54659898
Conferences are full of users. What the fuck do I care what our users use? I can talk about what we the devs use. Stop muddying the waters.
>>54659916
Your level: you actually claimed algorithms can be copyrighted.
You keep denying the actual real historical fact when Linux developers stole BSD code.
You keep spewing disinformation (like Mac OS X is just FreeBSD with a fancy GUI, etc.).
That is your level.
>>54659926
>I can talk about what we the devs use
What do you use on your laptop?
>>54659493
I'm not a shill, I'm just stating the obvious that anyone who has worked for a long period in different IT environments (large/small) will know.
>>54659954
don't worry, m8, bsd devs also stole linux code so it's all good
>>54659926
>You've never used Unix, have you?
No, it was dead well before I was born.
>>54659390
There is no way that even Lennart, stupid shithead that he is, actually said this.
>>54659992
What is your contribution to open source?
>>54659957
It's an old IdeaPad N586.
>>54660000
What does that have to do with what I just said?
>>54659972
Nice meme, but they didn't.
>>54660000
He warns people about harmful software on /g/ silly.
>>54659972
What kind of FUD is this?
>>54660014
I was just wondering what someone smarter than Lennart could accomplish. So, what is it?
>>54660034
And I was just wondering why you're responding to my post with bait and non-sequitur. Again, I refuse to believe that little dipshit actually said that.
>>54660020
m8, we all know how they stole bcm
>>54659975
It's still not dead, actually. You're obviously an edgy teen with no actual IT experience who just talks from what he's read online.
Yet again, the shills harass people who don't want to use systemD.
>>54660052
He didn't say it, I did (I'm neither you nor the person you're responding to, I'm >>54659390)
>>54660052
So... nothing? Are you just the average mentally ill anime pedo?
>>54660072
Except no. They used clean-room design to create a driver based on bcm. If that's the best example you can come up with, then you're obviously grasping at straws to come up with a "tu quoque". Stay frustrated.
>>54660079
Well, that's a relief. For a moment, I thought that worthless little asshat was actually glorifying Windows and promoting a movement towards its design philosophies.
>>54660073
it's dead tho
>>54657474
Pretty sure that Urinal guy killed himself because of Systemd.Don't remember the specifics,but he predicted it was dangerous.
>>54660073
>It's still not dead, actually.
You can dry hump it all you like,it's not coming back.
>>54660088
I've contributed just as much to free software as you have.
Don't worry guys, despite the shills we are going to continue supporting alternatives to this madness.
>>54660090
>clean-room
bwahahahaha, m8, I told you we already know the truth, no point in trying to rewrite history; theo HIMSELF acknowledges it wasn't a clean-room implementation:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.bcm54xx.devel/4080
>>54660123
How do you know what I've contributed?
>>54656065
Why do lincucks keep whining about systemd when similar bloat has become absolutely necessary for device management?
You never complained about udev ridding you of options or destroying the unix way. You never even complained about dbus. Is it because you never interacted with it? Because you're a ricer tard that knows more about .Xresources and bash/zsh/mksh than their actual operating system?
>>54660208
I don't, anymore than you know my contributions.
Or just install Void Linux. I use it all the time and it's systemd free.
>>54660218
That's why I asked. Here's again: what are your contributions?
>>54660211
>You never complained about....
Fedoralords parroting the blogs of elderly autists who had the carpet yanked out from under them.Adapt or die.
>>54660279
About the same as yours.
>>54660200
BTFO
T
F
O
checked & confirmed
>>54660288
>evading an answer
So, you're just full of shit. You should suck Lennarts dick, you worthless piece of shit!
>>54660309
Full of shit about what?
>>54660033
it's true tho, anyone that didn't live in a cave knows it by now
>>54659399
REKT
E
K
T
checked & confirmed
ITT: bsdcucks and anti-systemd shits got told hard
>>54660367
ITT: your baits failed so you're going all out.
>>54660372
>pls no bully
:^)
>>54660372
>he destroyed our "arguments" and shit all over us
>it was bait tho
whatever lets you sleep, honey
>>54660401
There were arguments in this thread? Where? All I saw was a bunch of kids trying to troll each other with the usual tribalistic "us vs. them" bullshit usually reserved for CPU and GPU flamewars.
>>54658456
>that means you're a cuck
>I just use FreeBSD or OpenBSD
Anon, I have bad news...
>>54660414
"arguments", you dip; here's in meme form so your shit filled skull can understand: """""""arguments"""""""
>>54660439
Yeah, man. That's a pretty cool meme.
>>54660414
>bullshit usually reserved for CPU and GPU flamewars.
I'm out when the hate rapes and fellatio start though.
>>54660458
>I was on the wrong side of the dick
lad...
I wonder why the BSD license thing isn't a problem when you're talking about Toybox, PostgreSQL, Lumina, OpenRC, and a million of other great and very successful pieces of free software. But suddenly, when the subject is FreeBSD and OpenBSD, then the license becomes a problem. Are Linux users so insecure and lacking technical arguments against BSDs and in favour of their own OS that they really have to appeal to vapid shit like criticizing the BSDs' license? Pathetic!
>>54661005
All I know is that I'd move to move to a BSD, if I could get my damned hardware working with it. I get that's my fault, and not a BSD issue, but it's still frustrating.
I don't like the Linux development style, and I certainly don't care for all the political baggage that comes with it. I just want to use a UNIX-like without any bullshit, and the BSDs seem perfect for that.
>>54657556
>imblyng GNU/Linux ever paid attention to Unix values
GNU/Linux is the least Unixlike Unixlike that exists.
>>54661005
There are so many technical arguments against the BSDs that there's no point in mentioning them anymore. Licensing is a massive issue for an operating system because it means people can use it and never release fixes and the like, which, unlike with single-use software like databases and init systems, which require significantly less contributions to actually reach a state where only maintenance is needed, is a massive issue.
>>54661144
>Licensing is a massive issue for an operating system because it means people can use it and never release fixes and the like
How exactly is this different from the GPL?
>>54661144
Holy shit you know exactly 0 of what goes into a DBMS if you really believe that.
>>54659558
But you're allowed to do anything to code under the BSD licence, including GPL it.
Mind you, I dislike GPL, but that's part of the freedom the BSD/MIT licences give you. They allow people to close/GPL code.
>>54661005
IIRC OpenRC was meant to be used by the BSDs too and that was the reason for its license. Probably the same situation with the other software.
>>54661144
>Take GPL software
>Never give the binaries to people outside your company
>Therefore, never release the source
>No GPL clause about no NDAs
>GPL2 lets it be tivoized
>>54661387
this is no issue compared to consoles using thoroughly modified bsd's because it's free work done for them but there will never be any contributions back into the core.
>>54661239
Apparently according to Theo(>>54659658), you can only apply the GPL to BSD software if you actually contribute something substantial to the code. If you're only including it in another application or changing the formatting you're not actually doing anything so you have no right to apply your own copyright to the code. Even if you do actually change the code somewhat you still have to abide by the BSD license, your copyright does not override the copyright of another person. The BSD license has be posted somewhere visible to the public in addition to posting the GPL somewhere.
>>54657556
>Unix philosophy
>when Linux is literally everywhere doing everything
>>54656065
>Beta
Toppest of keks. If anything you should post SJWs invading Debian. I don't give a fuck, Debian is a great OS and I have no real reason to hop to another distribution.
>>54661671
Yeah, I don't disagree with you, the BSD licence has the be somewhere below or above the GPL licence in the licence text or source code comments.
Huh, neat.
http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20070913014315&pid=6
>>54659803
Dont send him to plan9, we dont want him.
I recognize that writeup about the Atheros / Linux / SFLC story is a
bit complex, so I wrote a very simple explanation to someone, and they
liked it's clarity so much that they asked me to post it for everyone.
Here it is (with a few more changes)
-----
starting premise:
you can already use the code as it is
steps taken:
1. pester developer for a year to get it under another license.
- get told no, repeatedly
2. climb over ethical fence
3. remove his license
- get caught, look a bit stupid
4. wrap his license with your own
- get caught, look really stupid
5. assert copyright under author's license, without original work
- get caught, look even more stupid
Right now the wireless linux developers -- aided by an entire team of
evidently unskilled lawyers -- are at step 5, and we don't know what
will happen next. We wait, to see what will happen.
Reyk can take them to court over this, but he must do it before the
year 2047.
>>54661518
So what? It's free software, let them enjoy it. You can do it too, why haven't you? They don't have an unfair advantage because it's free for EVERYONE.
>>54661702
This.
And man, configuring daemons to run as i want them seems so much more straightforward in systemD
>>54662247
There is a basis for using plaintext files. They're quite easy to copy across many different machines and if there's only a handful of services they basically tell you everything about what services are enabled or disabled. You can even write descriptive comments for further documentation.
>>54662247
>rcctl enable [daemon]
>rcctl order [daemon]
>rcctl disable [daemon]
Can't get much more straightforward than this, anon.
http://www.zdnet.com/article/linus-torvalds-and-others-on-linuxs-systemd/
>>54662385
Linus basically doesn't concern himself with userspace stuff. I think he finds it completely uninteresting actually.
>>54662292
systemD service files are plaintext?
>>54662298
>systemctl enable service
>systemctl edit service
>systemctl disable service
Its exactly as straighforward in systemD
>>54662542
>systemD service files are plaintext?
Are they? I was more referring to OpenRC style daemon managers I have no idea how systemd stores its configuration, I just assumed it was probably different.
>>54662298
yeah but that doesn't start in parallel and might not properly managed dependencies. it looks like it just sets up a static boot order.
it also doesn't do service supervision.
Why didn't runit get any traction?
>>54657556
yea, emacs does just 1 thing
>>54657474
it is bad because of poetering's publicly stated agressive intent to integrate / replace / consume already existing important software and shuv it everyone's throat
>Devuan
>not based Void
>>54662559
Notably though systemD stores its logs in a binary format, which is less good.
Of all the kinds of things you could store in text, the two best candidates are configs and logs, for fuck's sake.
>>54662595
>dependencies
Use rcctl order.
>service supervision
Use rcctl ls.
>>54662621
While emacs does have a lot of things in it, emacs exists more as a platform or framework to put things onto.
If you were to strip out out all of the extraneous .elisp modules and you were left with just the emacs core, you would have just an editor with macro support. You don't even get the modes without it.
In the end it's a matter entirely involving whether you ship the optional features in the standard box or make the users install it after. Vi/m can get monstrously bloated just like emacs is. That bloat doesn't necessarily detract from emacs's quality as an editor.
However, systemD is actively trying to replace other components. Further, emacs doesn't aggressively replace system components and tell you "use my replacements or you can't use emacs at all." But systemD does. The argument that systemD provides the legacy interfaces to make the user comfortable is red herring; it doesn't change the fact that under the hood, everything is, and has to be, systemD in order to get the init system.
No emacser I know (including myself) seriously uses emacs for more than the editor, and sometimes a personal assistant in org mode. The same people that use eshell, emacs-irc, or the games are the same kinds of people that insist that editing files with ed is the only "UNIX way".
>>54660099
>Pretty sure that Urinal guy killed himself because of Systemd
I kind of like systemd.
>>54656065
meh it juzt werks. When it becomes Win10-tier bullshit I'll switch to devuan or remove systemd manually.
>>54662947
>meh it juzt werks
So do other init systems without systemd's bullshit.
>>54662885
vi cannot become bloated, only vim can
Please do not slander vi, it has no extension capability.
>>54663026
>not using the standard editor ed
But i like systemd.
There is no reason to not use systemd. The unix way is an outdated way.
Long live FreeDesktop!
>>54663167
'sup Poettering?
>>54656065
>tfw gentoo with openrc
To those who are anti systemd, how attractive does RISC-V+Alpine sound?
>>54663167
Stay cucked faggot. i wish i could slap you with my dick through the internet
>>54663192
RISC-V FreeBSD please.
>>54663309
Because you want FreeBSD, or you want dat full BSD stack?
>>54663356
I like both OpenBSD and FreeBSD, but I don't think OpenBSD supports RISC-V yet.
>>54663167
>installing nsaD
systemd is what appears to be intentionally attempting to fragment the FOSS community by inserting bloated high velocity corporate code that by design makes itself as intrusive in terms of dependencies as possible.
This is a very bad precedent for FOSS and should be addressed with concern.
>>54657474
>reasons, which have been posted over, and over, and over
Like you even care. It's always the same. Someone will take the time to type out a clear explanation of at least some of what is wrong--there's too much to actually fit into one post--and then you'll just say, "nuh uh, valid reasons don't count against my precious!" Let's just pretend we've already plowed through that shit once more, and move straight to the name calling, and shit, you retarded dick freckle.
>>54659546
Incorrect. GNU's Not Unix. Linux however is technically. It even had the opportunity to become certified for basically nothing, but due to mismanagement and retarded office politics, that didn't happen.
>>54663578
>Like you even care. It's always the same. Someone will take the time to type out a clear explanation of at least some of what is wrong--
I hope you noticed this is a more general trend on this site
TURN DOWN FOR WHAT?
>>54664255
I dunno. Who're you replying to? Why does it have to be summer? Didn't we just do summer like a year ago?
>>54664383
It's a better philosophy since Linux is everywhere
>>54662459
He just don't want them to fuck up with the kernel. Because one systemd dev already made some shit with it. But nothing important.
>>54659784
Yeah, but all these freedoms are forfeit if you sell the program in order to make money from the work of others.
Fuck Apple
>>54659460
>Massive corporations can afford to buy out GPL projects.
I'm genuinely curious. Could you name one or more of these buyouts anon?
>>54659866
>our side
>your side
And thus allegiance becomes more important than truth.
>>54659569
Oh hi anon, here's my dick in your mouth, I know that air was good enough before, but now it's only my dick.
Open wide anon, this dick is great, see how large and erect it is, you can only have this dick though. You know you want it. You do! Well, regardless you'll get it anyways because i'm backed by my big gang who will ensure you take it like a champ. You're a gay faggot now who needs only the dick! Might as well just enjoy the ride... faggot!
>>54659884
Not surprisingly, one of the few posts with actual truth and reasoning in it gets ignored...
Anon, you're supposed to take sides if you want to be part of the conversation!
>not using a BSD operating system
lmao
p.s. apple doesn't count
>BSD
>cuck license
>>54656065
Just having old the oldfags get angry and leave to shitty forks makes systemd worth it
>>54665238
this
>>54659926
Dude I'm 29, linux user. Unix has been niche for a long time. FreeBSD has been revived recently in some chans, but it's all meme. It will die off again.
Thanks for considering me still an ignorant youngster though.
>>54660088
>he doesnt respond, but i want to keep trolling. lets try some insults to flush him out
>>54665175
>REEEEEEE
>DELETE THIS
top fucking kek! your ass is that sore, anon?
>>54662839
Can't someone just fork systemd and patch it to use plain text?
>>54665342
that is like having grotesque tumours on your face, and just painting over them with makeup to hide them. It doesn't deal with the underlying malignancy.
Daily reminder that systemd is FOSS (Free Open Source Software) and that it is good software that fulfils the needs of modern devops, sysadmins, regular users and even application developers. Since work on systemd project restarted in 2010 and it's initial inclusion in Fedora Jan 2011 it has gained code contributions from over 600 developers worldwide and became the default init system and session manager in every major GNU/Linux distribution since 2012. Developers from each of these have commit access and have helped to design and shape systemd to fit their needs and unify core system between distributions over the last 5 years.
However as great of an improvement as it has proven to be it has attracted many paid trolls and mentally ill Linux users who spread lies and FUD about it, a large group of these single out developers and attack them with constant trolling, abuse, stalking and even death threats. Many of these 'people' are from the *BSD camps; after Linux usage and contributions sky-rocketed 15 years ago they have been on a constant mission to cause trouble, including making threats of violence and rape against people who create GPL licensed code.
There are also thought to be many of these people on the payroll of Microsoft to try and destroy strong powerful FOSS projects by negative campaigning and lie/FUD spreading. Fortunately as usual for Microsoft their FUD campaign and paid shills turn up 4 years too late and don't have technical arguments, making it obvious what they are: paid trolls.
"I think your attitude is pretty typical of systemd detractors, and that attitude is exactly why systemd is making a victory sweep across all major Linux distributions;
Since you are in total denial of any existing problems with sysvinit, you are of course unable to suggest any alternative to it, or begin any coherent work on an alternative to it. The denial also suggest a lack of technical insight into the problem, and the pathetic lack of any alternative development work also suggest a lack of technical ability to make such an alternative.
This seemingly leaves systemd detractors with only one option; negative campaigning. So they have wasted years of slandering Lennart Poettering and other open source developers and companies, and whining, ranting and trolling on web forums, but without any real technical argumentation.
Using derogatory terms, like "bloat", or "Windoze crap" aren't technical argumentation, just like copy-pasting unattributed quotes from random sites about "Unix philosophy" doesn't convince anybody serious either.
You are also alienating people who may have been sympathetic to developing alternatives to systemd; who wants to join a bunch of anonymous people who rant like lunatics, and who seems to enjoy smug negative attitudes against other open source developers.
So to sum up; you are just a loud minority who conducts negative campaigning, seemingly without any ability to gather people to construct a positive alternative to systemd. As long as you deny any problems with sysvinit, and deny any positive merits of systemd, you will be unable to analyse the situation and therefore paralysed into inaction. This of course will mean, that Linux distro after Linux distro will switch over to systemd. Enjoy the future with systemd on every Linux distro; your negative attitude made it possible."
"I remember being severely disillusioned by this in my early days. I read some article that explained how a "spell" program can be written to report the spelling errors in a file. It uses 'tr' to split into words, then "sort" and "uniq" to get a word list, then "comm" to find the differences. "cool" I thought. Then I looked at the actual "spell" program on my university's Unix installation. It used a special 'dcomm' (or something like that) which knew about "dictionary ordering" (Which ignores case - sometimes). Suddenly the whole illusion came shattering down. Lots of separate tools only do 90% of the work. To do really complete work, you need real purpose-built tools. "do one thing and do it well" is good for prototypes, not for final products.
The thing that annoys me most about systemd is that I didn't write it first!"
- Neil Brown
http://lwn.net/Articles/576078/
>>54665379
>"devops"
stopped reading lmao
"The problem for Gnome and KDE is, that systemd is vastly superior to anything out there, and that it will help them dump loads of hard to maintain code, and give them easy access to make powerful distro-agnostic programs.
systemd provides a common, uniform Linux plumbing system that makes life easier for all user program developers. So of course Gnome and KDE will start to take advantage of systemd, why shouldn't they?
The main problem with those who for some reason or another doesn't like systemd, is that they are incredibly lazy. Instead of actually getting together to make an alternative development stack to systemd, they rant against Poettering and spew empty platitudes about "UNIX philosophy".
The most pathetic example of this anti-systemd laziness, is of course "ConsoleKit". It has now been unmaintained for +1½ years, but it is a crucial piece of infra-structure for any Desktop. But instead of either maintain it or make an alternative, anti-systemd people just rant against Gnome for no longer making it a priority to support this piece of abandonware. All rant and no work.
[...]
Yes, that is true last time you checked, and next KDE edition (KDE SC 5/Plasma 2) will of course also run on *BSD. But with reduced functionality on all non-systemd systems, compared with the systemd version.
This is not because of some sinister conspiracy, but because systemd offers easy use of many nice features that KDE and Gnome (and LXQT etc) would like to use, and non-systemd systems doesn't provide.
The point is exactly, that systemd is a very nice uniform Linux plumbing system, and that DE's are starting to take advantage of that."
"I’m trying really hard not to suggest launchd here (so I won’t). The idea of registering everything up-front with a broker and then letting IPC / timers / HW events start things from there (in cascade fashion) is still the right architecture. Even the linux die-hards have essentially grasped the necessity of systemd (even though they’re going to hate on it for awhile longer)"
- Jordan Hubbard, FreeBSD co-founder
"I don't personally mind systemd, and in fact my main desktop and laptop both run it."
- Linus Torvalds, ITWire Interview.
>>54665379
Why is OpenRC depricated?
>>54665453
Firstly OpenRC isn't even an init system.
There are much better init/rc/supervisor options; runit, s6, etc.
OpenRC is also a malicious project. It got abandoned by R.Marples several years ago and Gentoo devs took control of the repo and claimed ownership because of butthurt against upstart and systemd.
Lack of care, documentation and truth have been common ever since. Hence why in the Debian init debate it was thrown out so soon because no docs, overriding current script namespaces and the pushers (Gentoo devs and users) lied so hard about systemd they had to delete half of their wiki page showing off why it should be chosen and that did not go noticed, neither did moving it off of Gentoo infra to github to try make it look like a community project when it isn't.
>>54665414
>powerful distro-agnostic programs
>works only on fedora clones
>>54665624
Who are you quoting?
systemD is a shitty WinSXS copy, falls right inline with your new management.
>>54666224
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
bwahahahahahaha
I know 0 programming languages and know pretty much nothing about what SystemD actually does. However, SystemD seems liek some NSA shit. idgaf, though, because my computer running Linux Mint will still be able to play Steam games
>>54659546
>>54663609
Again , GNU/UNIX is a free CLONE OF UNIX
GNU/Linux is a CLONE OF UNIX.
If you don't understand this you are fucking stupid.
>>54659254
>muh boot speeds
I boot to xorg in 4 with s6 and openrc
