Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - Pay What You Want for the Learn to Code Bundle, includes AngularJS, Python, HTML5, Ruby, and more. ×

Comment Re:Wrong way around (Score 2) 578

The systemd team didn't create those dependencies, the DE maintainers did. All of these DEs ran just fine without systemd and they still could if someone was interested in doing so.

The systemd developers have been active in the DE mailing lists, encouraging them to make systemd a dependency. See here for an example.

Comment Re:Duh (Score 1) 578

And I've personally compiled and installed non-init parts of systemd.

Which parts? Do tell.

LOL no amount of trolling the links will get me interesting in reading your slashdot journal, and no, writing an essay does not replace discussion. Nobody is going to go read that shit. You're generally expected to type in new comments as part of a discussion, and to formulate them for the current context.

Are you capable of discussing things without insulting? So far the answer is no.

Comment Re:Duh (Score 1) 578

Is it not possible to just write a standard interface that would have it working with any init system?

That's the right idea, because the interfaces are more important than the code. It's more complex than just an "init interface," but clearly there needs to be a division between the init system and the "system manager demon."

Comment Re:Duh (Score 1) 578

For the average user, don't worry about the difference. ;)

The average user is happy with Windows, let's be honest.

Also, if you read the article, you absolutely do not need the systemd init system to use the new features.

I don't know what article you're talking about specifically, but it looks like to get it to work, you need to use an older version of uPower. And it isn't a new feature, it's a feature that's been there for a while a long time, but now depends on systemd.

using non-init parts of systemd to allow the desktop environment to monitor the user inputs

The non-init parts of systemd aren't separable from the init parts. I discussed part of the issue here.

As many skilled people as possible need to start thinking about the init problem, so we end up with something good.

Comment Re:Duh (Score 1) 578

You're right. KDE is not depending on an init system.

You're wrong......the "system management" portions don't work without the init system. For example, logind depends on systemd quite clearly, look at the function execute_shutdown_or_sleep().

People have tried to separate the system management portions from the init portions of systemd, but it was rather more difficult than you'd expect and they gave up.

Comment Re:Duh (Score 1) 578

It's not clear what you mean by "tight integration."

But it's not necessary to have a monolithic system in order to make something good.....to avoid it you need to make clear interfaces.

As mentioned, the kernel has to deal with much more integral and disparate pieces than systemd does, and yet it is still relatively simple to swap one kernel for another. If the kernels can do it, then there is no excuse for systemd.

And on the seventh day, He exited from append mode.