boycott systemd

[bark_bark_bark]

As I wrote the facts will not stop the lies posted here from anti-systemd crowd.

I don't see any facts posted by you. All I see is some delusional systemd fanboy spreading lies and propaganda.

I can't tell a lie, systemd is a pile of shit. It is unstable, insecure, and offers no advantage over sysvinit.

The only advantage it had was 'read ahead', but that got removed because LP is anti-user.

EDIT: Fanboyism is so childish. Maybe you should try looking at from an objective standpoint like I do.

[anikin]

bbb,

How about showing a little bit of class?
Your disrespectful comments don't make much sense.
Why can't you relax, go out, eat an ice cream or watch a movie?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... pp=desktop

[cimarron]

It takes one hour without donations and big words to do what Devuan is doing from months.

Okay, now we're getting somewhere. So what needs to be done? You say it takes an hour--is that an hour of preparation, maybe installing or uninstalling other packages, before running the commands to purge systemd?

Can it only be done with xfce? If so, then it sounds like the Devuan work is still necessary to run other DE without systemd. I tried removing systemd from Semplice (based on Debian sid) and ran into lots of dependencies, and that's not using Gnome shell but a modified Openbox desktop.

[mavrothal]

We have also very large group of people who do not mind to test, explore, improve and use systemd without saying anything bad for sysvinit or busybox and who do not act like animals.

So what about a *dog for the animals to "test, explore, improve and use" systemd?

[saintless]

Okay, now we're getting somewhere. So what needs to be done? You say it takes an hour--is that an hour of preparation, maybe installing or uninstalling other packages, before running the commands to purge systemd?

One hour for:
Setting up frugal install with persistence debian-live-8.0.0-i386-standard.iso (without included xorg).
Adding new root password and log in as root.
Then.

Code: Select all

apt-get update
apt-get install sysvinit
apt-get install sysvinit-core #this will remove default system-sysv
apt-get purge systemd* #Confirm with Yes, do as I say! and enter
apt-get -f install
apt-get autoremove

You will get some errors about still active systemd init can not be removed. Needs reboot here and again login as root:

Code: Select all

apt-get purge systemd
apt-get -f install
apt-get autoremove
apt-get install xorg

Then to save time searching where systemd is recommended package create /etc/apt/apt.conf to skip recommended with content:

Code: Select all

APT::Install-Recommends "false"; APT::Install-Suggests "false";

Then:

Code: Select all

apt-get update
apt-get install xfce4
apt-get install xfce4-power-manager
startx

This is all needed to get working XFCE without systemd dependencies and default sysvinit. Then you can check the recommended packages and install some of them also. To prevent installing systemd components you can use pinning systemd in /etc/apt/preferences. I'm sure there is a lot of information in google already about that and all you need is to use official Debian methods.

Can it only be done with xfce?

I'm sure Jwm, IceWM, LXDE and most smaller DE will work without need to install systemd.
For Gnome and maybe KDE some dependencies will include systemd or systemd components as dependency.
Gnome for example does not have direct dependency systemd inside the main package. It is dependency for some gnome component packages and most probably with some investigation it will be possible to install Gnome without systemd. The problem from what I read is Gnome expects some servises to act in a way provided only from systemd at the moment and could not be replaced from existing sysvinit and init-scripts.
I can't say if this is true or not and I do not care much since people who admire official Debian developers are described as systemd fanboys. I don't mind any init to be available and set by default (including systemd).

If so, then it sounds like the Devuan work is still necessary to run other DE without systemd.

Some programs depend on gtkdialog or yad and I do not find complains why the user choice is taken away. People install gtkdialog or yad to use them or find alterantive without yad or gtkdialog. Same should be valid for Gnome. It is developers choice what to include as dependency.
Too much noise about nothing. There is nothing wrong if Gnome exists also without systemd as dependency but the unofficial development should work with civilized methods.

Edit: What I think is easy from quick testing is latest Gnome to be installed with systemd dependencies but started with sysvinit instead as default init.

Edit2: Yes, piece of cake.

[bark_bark_bark]

Your disrespectful comments don't make much sense.

Actually, it does make sense.

And trust me, the systemd fanboys say a lot more hurtful/hateful things then the anti-systemd crowd.

[cimarron]

Thank you, saintless. That's helpful. I hope no one calls you a "fanboy" any more.

I see there are options, though it seems some important software is still systemd-dependent. In my case: udisks2, policykit, lightdm, network-manager. I see there are devuan replacements for the first two: How to install systemd-independent udisks2 and policykit before removing systemd from a Debian jessie/sid installation I guess I could find alternatives for the others without too much trouble...

[James C]

Thank you, saintless. That's helpful. I hope no one calls you a "fanboy" any more.

I see there are options, though it seems some important software is still systemd-dependent. In my case: udisks2, policykit, lightdm, network-manager. I see there are devuan replacements for the first two: How to install systemd-independent udisks2 and policykit before removing systemd from a Debian jessie/sid installation I guess I could find alternatives for the others without too much trouble...

Looking back over this thread, in particular my posts, I see nowhere is saintless called a "fanboi'/"fanboy".

I see nothing in this thread attacking Debiandog.

I do read saintless' posts basically attacking and belittling anyone who disagrees.

Don't believe anyone has said it's hard to replace systemd as pid1 (init) with sysvinit,upstart or whatever....that is the easy part. Removing systemd and all it's dependencies is the sometimes difficult part.

It's not personal with me,if anyone wants to use systemd use it,your choice. Some people choose to not use it.Any real points get lost in the childish personal attacks though.

[bark_bark_bark]

It's not personal with me,if anyone wants to use systemd use it,your choice. Some people choose to not use it.Any real points get lost in the childish personal attacks though.

+1

I don't care if a distribution offers it as long as they don't force it down users throats and it's 100% optional to run.

[starhawk]

James C, I concur with your summation. I see a lot of saintless attacking, and a lot of logic and reason from others.

bark, I think you and I are on the same page. I'd have a different reaction if it didn't sound like they were trying to take over everything with it.

saintless, I'm sure you can find exceptions to what I just said... I have an IRL friend who had an excellent experience with Windows Vista and totally doesn't get what all the fuss is about it. You can always find one person or example, maybe even two or three, that defy a trend. Always. However, raising it up and pointing it out, misses my point entirely.

Please do read the second of the two articles I posted links to, the one about startup notification types. (Looking back, I now see that jamesbond posted the same article, earlier. Good on him, and bad on me for not double-checking!)

In that article is some discussion of what I personally would categorize as something that seems fairly sinister -- the way these notifications work pulls systemd in as a dependency. You absolutely must write your code to work with systemd or it won't work with systemd -- and it appears that the opposite is true, which in a way is worse -- when written to work with systemd, the same code will not work with systems using other init systems such as sysvinit and Busybox init.

I should probably also mention that, when trying to determine what's going on with a particular subject, the rather-universally-accepted-as-proper way is to examine the evidence and form a conclusion around it. If you are discarding the evidence to fit a predetermined conclusion, you are --to be blunt-- doing it wrong.

[James C]

There is an unofficial Devuan live disc by fsmithred of Refracta http://refracta.freeforums.org/ thai I posted about in another thread this morning.

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 158#842158

[bark_bark_bark]

Ubuntu did something that Debian didn't do: give users init system choice.

[starhawk]

That's smart. Having read the blurb, I'd say that I would want it a little different, specifically that the option would persist until the user switched inits back to systemd... but that's my personal opinion only. Armchair quarterbacking and don't I know it.

[saintless]

It is like talking to a wall here.
There is no example, fact or argument you will accept to make you see the truth. Twist the truth again and again to make it abusive for systemd and any linux with systemd as default init. No matter what is the number of users and developers insulted from the posts in this and similar threads. Close your eyes each time someone here tells you a lie how impossible or very difficult is to remove systemd and how it will break your system not only as default init, but even when it is just installed together with default sysvinit.

My question is, "Is 'Systemd-nspawn', part of systemd, and if so, does it have any relevance to this debate?".

Since nobody else dare to answer...
Yes, systemd-nspawn is part of systemd package. The same "monster" discussed here. Systemd-nspawn is described as chroot on steroids and I trust those guys it is truth.

[mavrothal]

It is like talking to a wall here.
There is no example, fact or argument you will accept to make you see the truth.

Let me repeat. Any *dog with systemd to make blind walls see?

[starhawk]

While we're repeating things...

I do read saintless' posts basically attacking and belittling anyone who disagrees.

Don't believe anyone has said it's hard to replace systemd as pid1 (init) with sysvinit,upstart or whatever....that is the easy part. Removing systemd and all it's dependencies is the sometimes difficult part.

It's not personal with me,if anyone wants to use systemd use it,your choice. Some people choose to not use it.Any real points get lost in the childish personal attacks though.

I should probably also mention that, when trying to determine what's going on with a particular subject, the rather-universally-accepted-as-proper way is to examine the evidence and form a conclusion around it. If you are discarding the evidence to fit a predetermined conclusion, you are --to be blunt-- doing it wrong.

It is like talking to a wall here.
There is no example, fact or argument you will accept to make you see the truth. Twist the truth again and again to make it abusive for systemd and any linux with systemd as default init.

saintless, it appears rather blatantly obvious to me -- and, in fact, seemingly most of the posters in this thread, for that matter -- that your position requires reconsideration. Judging by the content of your posts compared to those of others, it is perhaps us talking to the wall of you rather than the other way around. I can only conclude that either (a) you are indeed discarding the vast majority of evidence to suit the conclusion you have come to, or (b) you genuinely mean well but don't have a clue as to what you've overenthusiastically latched onto as the next big thing, or (c) some combination of possibilities 'a' and 'b'.

[saintless]

saintless, it appears rather blatantly obvious to me -- and, in fact, seemingly most of the posters in this thread, for that matter -- that your position requires reconsideration. Judging by the content of your posts compared to those of others, it is perhaps us talking to the wall of you rather than the other way around. I can only conclude that either (a) you are indeed discarding the vast majority of evidence to suit the conclusion you have come to, or (b) you genuinely mean well but don't have a clue as to what you've overenthusiastically latched onto as the next big thing, or (c) some combination of possibilities 'a' and 'b'.

You are the wall and you continue trying to involve me and others to share your opinion about systemd. I can't accept or deny your position how good is systemd. I don't know it enough and no one here knows it enough to have strong possition about systemd.
My possition is clear from my first post in this thread and from the next and the next...
My possition is it is developers choice what to be the default init. If it is systemd it doesn't make it bad linux. There is no need to insult systemd and Debian users and developers.
Most of my posts are answers to someone who is trying to provide false information how difficult or even impossible is to remove systemd once it is accepted as default init. This is a lie. But since there is no problem to use official Debian jessie with sysvinit and XFCE (and even Gnome witout systemd) this lie serves well new projects like Devuan. Necessary lies are very welcome here.
But most of you just don't get what my possition is because they are too busy to post links and lies about systemd and any distro that has it as default init.

[bark_bark_bark]

This kid is clearly denying the possibility that he is wrong and that he is the wall we are talking to.

[Scooby]

My possition is it is developers choice what to be the default init. If it is systemd it doesn't make it bad linux. There is no need to insult systemd and Debian users and developers.

this lie serves well new projects like Devuan. Necessary lies are very welcome here.

If your position is that it is the developers choice what to be the default init
then maybe you should extend that courtesy towards Devuan developers as well.

They are developers and their choice is to build a distro that doesn't rely on
systemd

[mavrothal]

My possition is it is developers choice what to be the default init.

DebianDog spins are based on the DebianLive > SageDebianLive > Debian-Light-builder by emil, chain.
Systemd is in Debian since the beginning.
Several months now is decided that systemd will be the default init in Debian.
DebianLive uses systemd-config package which is in the repos sometime now.
So it would appear that there is no apparent problem in deploying a systemd-based DebianDog spin.
So it is clear that you choose to avoid systemd in your spins and to not offer it even as an option
Could you tell us why?