Comment Re: Great consolidation GWeihir! (Score 1) 765
Fvwm has been around for 22 years so saying 25 years is probably almost correct. It was actually quite popular back in the early 90s.
Fvwm has been around for 22 years so saying 25 years is probably almost correct. It was actually quite popular back in the early 90s.
Well, there is no operating system anymore called BSD. BSD was around back in the 80's and early 90's. The free software operating systems that end in *BSD are not one operating system, and they don't share the kernel like the Linux distribution do. They are simply distinct operating systems that has a common historical heritage.
There are at least two alternatives for virtualization on FreeBSD, VirtualBox and Bhyve. I've never used Bhyve but it's designed similar to KVM on Linux.
That does not mean that everything he does on his spare time is done by Red Hat.
With the current trend of containerized environments the LTS releases are not necessarily the go-to choice for servers. Since everything about your deployment is automated moving to newer base OS is not really that big of deal in most cases. Getting access to newer versions of software can actually be desirable.
Systemd stores a lot of metadata in the journal, not just simple text rows. A custom format allows this to be queried very quickly.
Red Hat did not create systemd. It was created independently and Red Hat only adopted it after it proved itself in Fedora, and it even took a couple of years until Fedora adopted it.
If by by "kill" mean "improve" then yes.
Well, you've had four years of OS updates which is unfortunately much more than most other phones.
I really don't understand what the problem is. Do you even know what libsystemd is? It's not systemd and it does not force you to run systemd. You can have it installed and still have a completely systemd-free experience. This is *only* a problem if you can't live with having a single package with systemd in its name installed.
The other day I found out that it's impossible to use yum on a Red Hat machine with an expired RHN subscription. It proved quite unpleasant to work my way around it, as wget was not installed.
Of course you should have a valid subscription, otherwise you won't get security updates. It happens every now and then that I run into people that run five year old RHEL installations which they have never updated because they either are too cheap to pay for it or have never heard about CentOS.
Pretty soon we'll need a valid subscription to start daemons, something made possible by "improvements" like systemd.
It don't understand how you made that conclusion.
This subscription model is becoming quite the rage (Microsoft, Adobe, Red Hat, etc) and this is leading real fast to absurd situations like in the novel from Philip K. Dick (Ubik) where the guy has to pay a few dimes each time he wants to use the door of his apartment.
You have to pay if you want to continue to get binary software from Red Hat, you can always get it in source form even if you're not under a subscription.
He's a prime example of the mentality that keeps Linux from achieving mainstream desktop and laptop use.
He works on GNU, not Linux.
I wouldn't be surprised if most sysadmins actually want systemd, or at least is ok with it. From what I've seen the people that really don't want it is more of a vocal minority.
However, the fact that systemd comes with the "USE US OR FAIL!" dire warning (cf "if you don't use Windows, you can't use our ISP") and appears entirely engineered to intefere with everything on a Linux system, no matter how divorced from SETTING UP THE OS it is indicates that the proponents of systemd have one of two aims:
This article isn't even about systemd. You can fairly easily use Debian without systemd. This is about libsystemd which is a small library for interfacing with systemd if it is installed. It doesn't depend on systemd so you can have it installed without having systemd itself installed.
This is not even about systemd, it's a about libsystemd which is just a library for interfacing with systemd. You can have libsystemd installed and still don't have systemd itself installed. Debian has built some of their packages so that they depend on libsystemd, so installing them will bring libsystemd with them. Not a problem if you don't want to run systemd, but if you for some reason can't live with dpkg-query -l | grep systemd printing even a single line then this is apparently a problem.
I think it is rather obvious that there should be a way to have more options. Competition is good, choice is good. Can't someone fork a version without systemd? Also, note that other distribution, like Slackware, don't depend on systemd, but the pressure is mounting.
It's important to realize that this article is not about systemd, it's about libsystemd which is not systemd. It's a library that is used as an interface to systemd, and Debian has built some of it's packages to depend on it. Note that having libsystemd installed in no ways means that you have systemd installed. It's just a library that won't do anything if systemd itself is not installed.
Physician: One upon whom we set our hopes when ill and our dogs when well. -- Ambrose Bierce