Why Doesn't Root Dir Appear?

[Diego Garcia]

I just recently transitioned from static device nodes (simple and efficient) to dynamic
nodes (complex and pointless) using e/udev (not because of desire but because
of necessity due to the libinput fiasco wrought by GNOME/freedesktop).

My root directory is on partition /dev/sda3.

When I execute " df -h /dev/sda3" I get the message:

devtmpfs 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /dev

WTF! This is nonsense!

The command "cfdisk /dev/sda" shows this:

Device Boot Start End Sectors Size Id Type
/dev/sda1 * 2048 314574847 314572800 150G 83 Linux
/dev/sda2 314574848 629147647 314572800 150G 83 Linux
/dev/sda3 629147648 681576447 52428800 25G 83 Linux
/dev/sda4 681576448 1953525167 1271948720 606.5G 5 Extended
├─/dev/sda5 681578496 786436095 104857600 50G 83 Linux
...

The size of /dev/sda3 is 25G.

Also, the mount command shows:

/dev/sda3 on / type ext3 (rw,noatime,nodiratime)
...

No other partition shows this behavior.

If I execute "df -h /dev/sda5" I get:

/dev/sda5 49G 5.1G 42G 11% /usr

which is the correct usage information.

Why does "df -h /dev/sda3" fail to show the correct usage?

With static nodes this does not happen. Only the "new improved Linux," courtesy of
the GNOME/freedesktop faggots, does this lunacy prevail.

--
Scratch your technical itch:
https://www.linuxfromscratch.org/

[Grant Taylor]

On 11/29/21 4:40 PM, Diego Garcia wrote:
> When I execute " df -h /dev/sda3" I get the message:
>
> devtmpfs 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /dev
>
> WTF! This is nonsense!

That's what I'm used to. (More details below.)

> If I execute "df -h /dev/sda5" I get:
>
> /dev/sda5 49G 5.1G 42G 11% /usr
>
> which is the correct usage information.

That's unexpected to me.

> Why does "df -h /dev/sda3" fail to show the correct usage?

It does show the correct usage to me.

I'm used to df (disk free) showing the free space of the file system
containing the file that you ask about. So when you ask about
/dev/sda3, that's device file named "sda3" in the "/dev" file system.
The "/dev" file system happens to be tmpfs. Hence why you see what you
see in the first output.

I would have expected "df -h /dev/sda5" to also show the free space of
the "/dev" file system.

Try /just/ "df -h" and see if it shows your root file system. I expect
that it will.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

[David W. Hodgins]

On Mon, 29 Nov 2021 18:40:46 -0500, Diego Garcia <d...@chaos.info> wrote:
> Why does "df -h /dev/sda3" fail to show the correct usage?
>
> With static nodes this does not happen. Only the "new improved Linux," courtesy of
> the GNOME/freedesktop faggots, does this lunacy prevail.

On my Mageia 8 system, which uses udev ...
$ df /dev/sdb2
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/sdb2 63G 48G 13G 80% /

So it isn't a caused by using udev.

What's the full output of "df -h" without a device specified?

Regards, Dave Hodgins

[Aragorn]

On 29.11.2021 at 17:19, Grant Taylor scribbled:

> On 11/29/21 4:40 PM, Diego Garcia wrote:
>
> > When I execute " df -h /dev/sda3" I get the message:
> >
> > devtmpfs 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /dev
> >
> > WTF! This is nonsense!
>
> That's what I'm used to. (More details below.)

I don't know what distribution the OP is using, but he explicitly
mentioned eudev, which is a standalone udev fork created by Gentoo
because of earlier (meanwhile proven-false) concerns that the mainstream
udev — which now comes bundled as part of systemd — would no longer be
supporting distributions not based upon systemd.

I don't know what distribution the OP is using, but you yourself are a
Slackware user, and Slackware also used eudev. The OP is himself most
likely not using Slackware, because his distribution allows for the
installation of GNOME, which Slackware does not carry in its repository
— maybe he's using Devuan, because even Gentoo has already long ago
transitioned away from static device nodes.

So, what we have here are two presumably different distributions, both
using eudev, and both manifesting the same oddity in the output of the
"df" command, while at the same time, this oddity does not occur in
Mageia (as testified by Dave W. Hodgins), nor in Manjaro (as verified
by myself), both of which use the mainstream udev — Mageia is a
Mandriva fork, while Manjaro is based upon Arch and uses many
unmodified Arch packages, among which systemd and udev.

The above all said, logic therefore suggests that this odd behavior of
the "df" command would be due to a bug in eudev, and if so, then it
would probably be wise to report this to the upstream eudev developers
over at Gentoo.

--
With respect,
= Aragorn =

[Carlos E.R.]

On 30/11/2021 00.40, Diego Garcia wrote:
> I just recently transitioned from static device nodes (simple and efficient) to dynamic
> nodes (complex and pointless) using e/udev (not because of desire but because
> of necessity due to the libinput fiasco wrought by GNOME/freedesktop).
>
> My root directory is on partition /dev/sda3.
>
> When I execute " df -h /dev/sda3" I get the message:
>
> devtmpfs 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /dev

That's not your root, that's the size of the filesystem where
"/dev/sda3" is mounted, ie, "/dev".


I rather prefer that to see a copy paste showing the complete command
prompt sequence from start to end. Like this:

Telcontar:~ # df -h /dev/sda3

Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on

devtmpfs 16G 36K 16G 1% /dev
Telcontar:~ #


...

> Why does "df -h /dev/sda3" fail to show the correct usage?
>
> With static nodes this does not happen. Only the "new improved Linux," courtesy of
> the GNOME/freedesktop faggots, does this lunacy prevail.

It works fine here.

Look, the command doesn't tell you the size of a partition, but of a
mount point. Or filesystem, rather.

Telcontar:~ # df -h /dev/sda3

Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on

devtmpfs 16G 36K 16G 1% /dev
Telcontar:~ # df -h /dev/sda2

Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on

devtmpfs 16G 36K 16G 1% /dev
Telcontar:~ # df -h /dev/sda1

Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on

devtmpfs 16G 36K 16G 1% /dev
Telcontar:~ #


Before, it happened that the "mount point" /dev/sda3 happened to be the
same as root, so it gave the result you expected. But now, it is a
different partition (/dev), so it gives you the size of "/dev". Exactly
what you asked.


The correct command you want is not "df -h /dev/sda3", but "df -h /":

Telcontar:~ # df -h /

Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on

/dev/nvme0n1p5 148G 59G 82G 43% /
Telcontar:~ #


So, stop blaming udev, gnome, freedesktop, etc :-)


--
Cheers, Carlos.

[166p1]

Has he tried "sudo df -h" ??? I've run into permissions
issues with df before.

[Grant Taylor]

On 11/29/21 7:49 PM, Aragorn wrote:
> but you yourself are a Slackware user

Actually, I'm not.

I'm replying form a Gentoo system (still using udevd).

I have terminals open administering Debian, Ubuntu, and FreeBSD systems.

I've seen the behavior I described using `df` on Solaris and AIX too.

> The above all said, logic therefore suggests that this odd behavior
> of the "df" command would be due to a bug in eudev,

I can't agree with that.

Assuming that it's a bug in eudev is somewhat like thinking the fridge
has stopped cooling when the milk smells bad. There can be multiple
things going on, like /dev being it's own file system, or not, and the
milk having a best buy date /before/ the two week vacation that you go
back from a week ago.

I maintain that `df` has always shown the free space for the file system
the referenced file is on. If /dev/<bla> is on an independent /dev file
system, then it's perfectly natural that `df` will show the /dev file
system and device, /not/ the / (root) file system and device. If /dev
is not an independent file system and instead part of the / (root) file
system, that's a horse of a different color.

I'd be curious what the type, major, and minor numbers are for the
devices in question in /dev. After all, (e)udev etc. create device
nodes. The device nodes are actually the representation into the
kernel. If the device nodes are correct, then chances are quite good
that (e)udev is perfectly fine.

It may even be something associated with the way that things are mounted
causing df to mis-report the underlying file system that the device node
lives on vs the file system the node has on it.

There could be all sorts of things going on that may not be a bug in
(e)udev.

[Aragorn]

On 29.11.2021 at 21:22, Grant Taylor scribbled:

> On 11/29/21 7:49 PM, Aragorn wrote:
>
> > but you yourself are a Slackware user
>
> Actually, I'm not.

I deducted this from the fact that you appear to be mainly posting in
alt.os.linux.slackware.

My apologies, then. ;)

> > The above all said, logic therefore suggests that this odd behavior
> > of the "df" command would be due to a bug in eudev,
>
> I can't agree with that.
>
> Assuming that it's a bug in eudev is somewhat like thinking the
> fridge has stopped cooling when the milk smells bad. There can be
> multiple things going on, like /dev being it's own file system, or
> not, and the milk having a best buy date /before/ the two week
> vacation that you go back from a week ago.
>
> I maintain that `df` has always shown the free space for the file
> system the referenced file is on. If /dev/<bla> is on an independent
> /dev file system, then it's perfectly natural that `df` will show the
> /dev file system and device, /not/ the / (root) file system and
> device. If /dev is not an independent file system and instead part
> of the / (root) file system, that's a horse of a different color.

[nx-74205:/dev/pts/3][/home/aragorn]
[05:40:51][aragorn] > mount | grep sda3
/dev/sda3 on / type btrfs
(rw,nodev,noatime,nodiratime,sync,compress=zstd:3,ssd,space_cache,subvolid=257,subvol=/@)

[nx-74205:/dev/pts/3][/home/aragorn]
[05:41:28][aragorn] > mount | grep devtmpfs
devtmpfs on /dev type devtmpfs
(rw,nosuid,size=8121260k,nr_inodes=2030315,mode=755)

[nx-74205:/dev/pts/3][/home/aragorn]
[05:41:49][aragorn] > df -h /dev/sda3

Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on

/dev/sda3 1.0G 13M 781M 2% /

[nx-74205:/dev/pts/3][/home/aragorn]
[05:42:08][aragorn] >


In other words...

° My /dev is distinct from the root filesystem — its contents reside
on devtmpfs.

° I am not seeing the odd output that the OP is seeing, and that you
yourself report to be seeing as well.

Now, devtmpfs is initialized in the kernel itself and the device nodes
for the internally mounted — in the physical/mechanical sense — block
devices is enumerated by the kernel even before userspace is
initialized, so maybe the skewed output you are both seeing has
something to do with the kernel version?


[nx-74205:/dev/pts/3][/home/aragorn]
[05:48:47][aragorn] > uname -r
5.4.159-1-MANJARO

[nx-74205:/dev/pts/3][/home/aragorn]
[05:48:55][aragorn] >

[J.O. Aho]

On 30/11/2021 00.40, Diego Garcia wrote:

> I just recently transitioned from static device nodes (simple and efficient) to dynamic
> nodes (complex and pointless) using e/udev (not because of desire but because
> of necessity due to the libinput fiasco wrought by GNOME/freedesktop).
>
> My root directory is on partition /dev/sda3.
>
> When I execute " df -h /dev/sda3" I get the message:
>
> devtmpfs 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /dev
>
> WTF! This is nonsense!

df works only on properly mounted file systems, it fallbacks to /dev as
there ain't a mounted /dev/sda3.

I think the 7.8G is based on the amount of ram you have and those the
maximum space the /dev theoretically could occupy.

> The size of /dev/sda3 is 25G.
>
> Also, the mount command shows:
>
> /dev/sda3 on / type ext3 (rw,noatime,nodiratime)
> ...

Seems your mountpoint is wrong, the mount says it's /, so it seems you
have managed to mount it to / and on top of that you have mounted
/dev/sda2 (I'm guessing that is your system partition)

How does your /etc/fstab look like?

> With static nodes this does not happen. Only the "new improved Linux," courtesy of
> the GNOME/freedesktop faggots, does this lunacy prevail.

Switch to a distribution more fitted to your needs...


--

//Aho

[The Natural Philosopher]

Gnome is far above the kernel/filesystem code. Why are you raving at Gnome?


--
“But what a weak barrier is truth when it stands in the way of an
hypothesis!”

Mary Wollstonecraft

[Richard Kettlewell]

Grant Taylor <gta...@tnetconsulting.net> writes:
> On 11/29/21 4:40 PM, Diego Garcia wrote:
>> When I execute " df -h /dev/sda3" I get the message:

What does ‘df --version’ say?

What is the full contents of /proc/mounts?

>> devtmpfs 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /dev
>>
>> WTF! This is nonsense!
>
> That's what I'm used to. (More details below.)
>
>> If I execute "df -h /dev/sda5" I get:
>>
>> /dev/sda5 49G 5.1G 42G 11% /usr
>>
>> which is the correct usage information.
>
> That's unexpected to me.
>
>> Why does "df -h /dev/sda3" fail to show the correct usage?
>
> It does show the correct usage to me.
>
> I'm used to df (disk free) showing the free space of the file system
> containing the file that you ask about. So when you ask about
> /dev/sda3, that's device file named "sda3" in the "/dev" file
> system.

The documented behavior is:

If an argument FILE resolves to a special file containing a mounted
file system, ‘df’ shows the space available on that file system
rather than on the file system containing the device node. GNU ‘df’
does not attempt to determine the disk usage on unmounted file
systems, because on most kinds of systems doing so requires
extremely nonportable intimate knowledge of file system structures.

i.e. if you’re talking about coreutils df then you only got used to that
behavbior with unmounted filesystems.

Anyway the implication is that the OP’s df can’t determine that
/dev/sda3 is mounted for some reason. That’s a puzzle given mount can
apparently work it out.

--
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 30/11/2021 04:54, Aragorn wrote:
> On 29.11.2021 at 21:22, Grant Taylor scribbled:
>
>> On 11/29/21 7:49 PM, Aragorn wrote:
>>
>>> but you yourself are a Slackware user
>>
>> Actually, I'm not.
>
> I deducted this from the fact that you appear to be mainly posting in
> alt.os.linux.slackware.
>
> My apologies, then. ;)
>

No Aragorn, strictly you *inferred* it.


*deductive* logic is of the nature of:

IF a straight line is the shortest distance between two points THEN (all
of geometry, etc) is *demonstrably* true.

If you want to view it in terms of information, one can prove that e.g.
the *deductions* of formal geometry contain no more information than is
expressed by it's axioms: That is the formal proofs of geometry are in
fact no more than explications of implicit information contained in the
axioms.

This is a completely different case from *inductive* logic, where
instead of working from axioms (or prime causes) to effects, we try to
work the reverse magic: go from effects, to *possible causes*.

The problem here is that there is a many-to-one set of potential causes,
for any effect.

e.g. the *demonstrable fact* of his posting in alt.os.linux.slackware
*might* mean that he is secretly enamoured of another poster there, he
once installed slackware and hasn't unsubscribed yet, he is off his
trolley and thinks slackware is a form of clothing....

This is the generalised form of Hume's Problem Of Induction.
Winnie Ille Pu said:

"De heffalumpis semper dubitandum est. Cura ut bene valeas!"*

Which of course was plagiarised by Kierkegaard as "De omnibus
dubitandum est".

But the message is clear. Doubt must the default condition when applied
to inductive hypothesises, or inferences.

Everything from Divine Intervention to the Russians must be considered a
suspect, And as Sherlock Holmes incorrectly remarked 'when you have
eliminated all the impossible, whatever is left must be the truth' Sadly
for Sherlock, he was involved not in deduction, but in induction, and
only in fiction does the *possible* truth become *single valued*.

In short there are an infinite number of explanations that *don't* fit
the facts and an infinite number that *do*.

And anyone who claims they have arrived at 'The scientific truth' is
dangerously deluded.

William of Ockham along with other mediæval thinkers was well aware of
this :
"Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate"

Which basically boils down to '[since we can't know the truth], keep
theories simple enough to work and no more'

A view the Church tried correctly to instil in Galileo, when he
attempted to ascribe Truth content to what was simply another inductive
theory, and as we know from Einstein, there is no centre round which
everything rotates anywhere in the Universe, it's all relative, so you
just pick the most convenient axes**.

So it is important to understand that deduction is logic, but science
and casual explanations lie in the realm of induction, or inference, and
the only advantage science ultimately has, is not the establishment of
truth content, but in the efficacy of its predictions. Science that
doesn't predict what happens, isn't science. ***

*Winnie Ille Pu:
https://kupdf.net/download/winnie-ille-pupdf_59c0fd2f08bbc57e12686fb6_pdf

**http://vps.templar.co.uk/Cartoons%20and%20Politics/centrifugal_force.png

*** except of course ClimateScience, where the 'science' has singularly
failed to predict anything that has actually happened to any degree of
accuracy better than chance.

--
"First, find out who are the people you can not criticise. They are your
oppressors."
- George Orwell

[Diego Garcia]

On Mon, 29 Nov 2021 17:19:36 -0700, Grant Taylor wrote:

>
> Try /just/ "df -h" and see if it shows your root file system. I expect
> that it will.
>

It does:

[~]# df -h

Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on

/dev/root 25G 16G 8.3G 65% /
tmpfs 7.8G 508K 7.8G 1% /run

devtmpfs 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /dev

/dev/sda5 49G 5.1G 42G 11% /usr

But this does not:

[~]# df -h /dev/sda3

Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on

devtmpfs 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /dev

But this also does:

[News]# df -h /

Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on

/dev/root 25G 16G 8.3G 65% /

[Diego Garcia]

On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 03:49:50 +0100, Aragorn wrote:

>
> I don't know what distribution the OP is using,
>

A distro, in my view, should only be a stepping stone toward creating ones
own standalone GNU/Linux system.

Linux is a lot simpler than it may appear and if one not be dependent on
a distro after a few years of using and learning Linux.

Every user should have his own personal distro.

[Diego Garcia]

On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 08:59:45 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

>
> Gnome is far above the kernel/filesystem code. Why are you raving at Gnome?
>

I gave the reason.

GNOME, via freedesktop.org, has succeeded in mandating the use of libinput as
the only input driver for X Window, which thereby destroys the possibility of using
static device nodes which thereby overly complicates the entire GNU/Linux system.

[Diego Garcia]

On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 05:54:11 +0100, Aragorn wrote:

>
> Now, devtmpfs is initialized in the kernel itself and the device nodes
> for the internally mounted — in the physical/mechanical sense — block
> devices is enumerated by the kernel even before userspace is
> initialized,
>

That may be the way most distros do it, but it's not the only way and
it's not the way that I do it.

The end result, in any case, is the same.

[marrgol]

On 30/11/2021 at 12.07, Diego Garcia wrote:
>> Try /just/ "df -h" and see if it shows your root file system. I expect
>> that it will.
>>
>
> It does:
>
> [~]# df -h
> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
> /dev/root 25G 16G 8.3G 65% /
> tmpfs 7.8G 508K 7.8G 1% /run
> devtmpfs 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /dev
> /dev/sda5 49G 5.1G 42G 11% /usr
>
> But this does not:
>
> [~]# df -h /dev/sda3
> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
> devtmpfs 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /dev
>
> But this also does:
>
> [News]# df -h /
> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
> /dev/root 25G 16G 8.3G 65% /

You have /dev/root mounted on /, not /dev/sda3.

What does 'ls -l /dev/sda3 /dev/root' show you?
I'd say these are both device files with the same
major and minor numbers… Like this:

# ls -l /dev/sdf1 /dev/foo
brw-rw---- 1 root root 8, 81 Nov 30 13:04 /dev/foo
brw-rw---- 1 root disk 8, 81 Nov 28 19:21 /dev/sdf1
#
# mount | grep ' /boot '
/dev/sdf1 on /boot type ext4 (rw,relatime)
#
# df -h /dev/sdf1

Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on

/dev/sdf1 487M 163M 295M 36% /boot
#
# df -h /dev/foo

Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on

devtmpfs 4.0M 8.0K 4.0M 1% /dev
#
# umount /boot
# mount /dev/foo /boot
#
# mount | grep ' /boot '
/dev/foo on /boot type ext4 (rw,relatime)
#
# df -h /dev/sdf1

Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on

devtmpfs 4.0M 8.0K 4.0M 1% /dev
#
# df -h /dev/foo

Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on

/dev/foo 487M 163M 295M 36% /boot
#


--
mrg

[Richard Kettlewell]

Diego Garcia <d...@chaos.info> writes:
> On Mon, 29 Nov 2021 17:19:36 -0700, Grant Taylor wrote:
>> Try /just/ "df -h" and see if it shows your root file system. I expect
>> that it will.
>>
>
> It does:
>
> [~]# df -h
> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
> /dev/root 25G 16G 8.3G 65% /

^^^^^^^^^

This is why. df can’t find a filesystem corresponding to /dev/sda3,
because / is mounted on /dev/root. That ultimately resolves to the same
thing but not in a way that df can see through.

--
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[Richard Kettlewell]

Diego Garcia <d...@chaos.info> writes:
> Aragorn wrote:
>> I don't know what distribution the OP is using,
>
> A distro, in my view, should only be a stepping stone toward creating ones
> own standalone GNU/Linux system.
>
> Linux is a lot simpler than it may appear and if one not be dependent on
> a distro after a few years of using and learning Linux.
>
> Every user should have his own personal distro.

That would be impractical for most users and a ridiculous waste of time
and effort for the rest.

--
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[J.O. Aho]

On 30/11/2021 00.40, Diego Garcia wrote:

Subject is a bit misleading... those my original post didn't include the
following:

> I just recently transitioned from static device nodes (simple and efficient) to dynamic
> nodes (complex and pointless) using e/udev (not because of desire but because
> of necessity due to the libinput fiasco wrought by GNOME/freedesktop).
>
> My root directory is on partition /dev/sda3.
>
> When I execute " df -h /dev/sda3" I get the message:
>
> devtmpfs 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /dev

/dev/sda3 ain't mounted, you have /dev/root mounted, sure they are the
same partition this time. The /dev/root was mounted by the initramfs for
your kernel as there was a lack of root= option in the boot loader for
your kernel.

Add root=/dev/sda3 to the kernel options and you should have /dev/sda3
mounted instead of /dev/root.


This is unrelated to the redhat gnome gang.


--

//Aho

[The Natural Philosopher]

+ 1000

Yes I customise my desktop, no it is not a 'new distro'


--
“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere,
diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.”
― Groucho Marx

[Diego Garcia]

On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 12:40:56 +0000, Richard Kettlewell wrote:

>>
>> Every user should have his own personal distro.
>
> That would be impractical for most users and a ridiculous waste of time
> and effort for the rest.
>

Not so.

Once the initial phase of customization is complete, maintenance
becomes very easy provided one uses an automated build system such
as Gentoo Portage or Pauludis which will keep track of all dependencies.

The Linux kernel is very stable and the user only has to be troubled
to enter "make oldconfig" at the keyboard with each new release.

I devote about 30 minutes maximum each week in maintaining my custom
"distro."

There is no real argument against doing this.

The only exception is when some rouge, renegade, psuedo-authorithy
like RedHat, GNOME, or freedesktop.org decides to break the stability
with some new-fangled "improvement" and to abandon support for all other
options.

That's exactly what happened with libinput. The user then has to scramble
to accommodate these tyrannanical changes.

[Carlos E.R.]

Yep.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Diego Garcia]

On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 03:49:50 +0100, Aragorn wrote:

>

> eudev, which is a standalone udev fork created by Gentoo
> because of earlier (meanwhile proven-false) concerns that the mainstream
> udev — which now comes bundled as part of systemd — would no longer be
> supporting distributions not based upon systemd.
>

That's not true. The reason for the eudev fork was that non-glibc
systems were having problems. Read this from Gentoo news:

"The integration of udev into the systemd git repo introduced numerous
problems for non-glibc systems, such as musl and uclibc. Several
options were considered, and the one chosen was to fork and maintain udev
independent of the rest of systemd."

These problems have been recently eliminated but the freedom-of-choice
community still has strong suspicions about the motives of systemd
developers.

[Diego Garcia]

On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 13:06:54 +0100, marrgol wrote:

>
> What does 'ls -l /dev/sda3 /dev/root' show you?
> I'd say these are both device files with the same
> major and minor numbers… Like this:
>

[~]# ls -l /dev/sda3 /dev/root
ls: cannot access '/dev/root': No such file or directory
brw-rw---- 1 root disk 8, 3 Nov 30 17:15 /dev/sda3

[Diego Garcia]

On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 07:57:22 +0100, J.O. Aho wrote:

>
> How does your /etc/fstab look like?
>

/dev/sda3 / ext3 defaults,noatime,nodiratime 1 0
/dev/sda6 swap swap defaults 0 0
/dev/sda5 /usr ext3 defaults,noatime,nodiratime 1 0
/dev/sda8 /opt ext3 defaults,noatime,nodiratime 1 0
/dev/sda7 /tmp ext3 defaults,noatime,nodiratime 1 0
proc /proc proc nosuid,noexec,nodev 0 0
sysfs /sys sysfs nosuid,noexec,nodev 0 0
devpts /dev/pts devpts gid=5,mode=620 0 0
tmpfs /run tmpfs defaults 0 0
devtmpfs /dev devtmpfs mode=0777,nosuid 0 0

[Diego Garcia]

On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 09:41:10 +0000, Richard Kettlewell wrote:

>
> What is the full contents of /proc/mounts?
>

/dev/root / ext3 rw,noatime,nodiratime 0 0
tmpfs /run tmpfs rw,relatime,inode64 0 0
proc /proc proc rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime 0 0
sysfs /sys sysfs rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime 0 0
devtmpfs /dev devtmpfs rw,nosuid,relatime,size=8167508k,nr_inodes=2041877,mode=755,inode64 0 0
/dev/sda5 /usr ext3 rw,noatime,nodiratime 0 0
/dev/sda8 /opt ext3 rw,noatime,nodiratime 0 0
/dev/sda7 /tmp ext3 rw,noatime,nodiratime 0 0
devpts /dev/pts devpts rw,relatime,gid=5,mode=620,ptmxmode=000 0 0

[Diego Garcia]

On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 17:15:56 +0100, J.O. Aho wrote:

>
> Add root=/dev/sda3 to the kernel options and you should have /dev/sda3
> mounted instead of /dev/root.
>

I have been using that option from time immemorial and only with
e/udev have I seen this problem.

/dev/sda3 is mounted by the kernel at boot or else my boot scripts
would not function.

These scripts run in user space and call udevadm to do a post-trigger
of the events already read by the kernel. It will produce the exact same
/dev tree that I could produce myself with static nodes. What a waste!

But it's no longer important. I can now use df to find how much space is left
on /dev/sda3.

[stepore]

On 11/29/2021 03:40 PM, Diego Garcia wrote:

> <snip> courtesy of

> the GNOME/freedesktop faggots, does this lunacy prevail.
>

Intolerant. Hostile. Homophobic.

[Bobbie Sellers]

Very likely but at least he is against systemd so he is not
totally depraved and void of human feelings.


bliss - brought to you by the power and ease of PCLinuxOS
and a minor case of hypergraphia

[Aragorn]

On 30.11.2021 at 20:21, Bobbie Sellers scribbled:

> On 11/30/21 19:54, stepore wrote:
>
> > On 11/29/2021 03:40 PM, Diego Garcia wrote:
> >
> >> <snip> courtesy of the GNOME/freedesktop faggots, does this lunacy
> >> prevail.
> >
> > Intolerant. Hostile. Homophobic.
>
> Very likely but at least he is against systemd so he is not
> totally depraved and void of human feelings.

Isn't your condemnation of systemd — especially when you've never used
it and/or studied its methodology — equally intolerant and prejudiced?
;)

Parroting someone else's opinion without doing one's homework is easy,
and I too have been guilty of that in the past, including when it came
to systemd. But I studied it, I discovered its merits, and I
decided to give it a chance.

And now that I'm using it, I can find nothing about sysvinit that would
ever make me want to go back to it. Besides, sysvinit is no longer
being maintained — it's effectively abandonware — while systemd is.
And you don't have to use all of it; you only use the parts that you
like, and you disable and/or mask what you don't like.

[Bobbie Sellers]

On 11/30/21 21:39, Aragorn wrote:
> On 30.11.2021 at 20:21, Bobbie Sellers scribbled:
>
>> On 11/30/21 19:54, stepore wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/29/2021 03:40 PM, Diego Garcia wrote:
>>>
>>>> <snip> courtesy of the GNOME/freedesktop faggots, does this lunacy
>>>> prevail.
>>>
>>> Intolerant. Hostile. Homophobic.
>>
>> Very likely but at least he is against systemd so he is not
>> totally depraved and void of human feelings.
>
> Isn't your condemnation of systemd — especially when you've never used
> it and/or studied its methodology — equally intolerant and prejudiced?
> ;)

Oh i used it myself for a while using Mageia a few years back. While my
favorite system was still figuring out it could use UEFI or at
least EFI.

>
> Parroting someone else's opinion without doing one's homework is easy,
> and I too have been guilty of that in the past, including when it came
> to systemd. But I studied it, I discovered its merits, and I
> decided to give it a chance.

Good for you.

>
> And now that I'm using it, I can find nothing about sysvinit that would
> ever make me want to go back to it. Besides, sysvinit is no longer
> being maintained — it's effectively abandonware — while systemd is.
> And you don't have to use all of it; you only use the parts that you
> like, and you disable and/or mask what you don't like.
>

There are other startup tools, Ask Dr.Klaus Knopper of Knoppix
renown as he has recently(?) written his own tool. A few others around.
I checked the package list on 4MLinux 38 earlier today and could not
find the name of a package that I could recognize as startup. But I bet
that it boots up on schedule when the ISO is written to a drive properly.

There are a lot of people who feel negatively toward systemd, and other
parts for some standard distributions. I have never seen a
Gnome since 2.4 that I liked. Reading the about latest versions does
not improve my opinion. I really hated to have to use the old Ubuntu
desktop environment and I had to try to fix it for people who had not
kept up with the evolution of Ubuntu using antique versions that were
past being up-date-able. I prefer KDE as it has been and consider Mate
to be my second choice. My preferences in desktops and how they work
matured with Amiga OS 2.1 before we all had to get on the damned Internet.
And thank you, systvinit seems to be mature and works
just fine. I boot up this machine every day and somehow against all
odds considering how badly I can screw up a good install, it starts.

bliss - brought to you by the power and ease of PCLinuxOS
and a minor case of hypergraphia

--
bliss dash SF 4 ever at dslextreme dot com

[Richard Kettlewell]

Diego Garcia <d...@chaotic.info> writes:
> Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>>> Every user should have his own personal distro.
>>
>> That would be impractical for most users and a ridiculous waste of time
>> and effort for the rest.
>>
>
> Not so.
>
> Once the initial phase of customization is complete, maintenance
> becomes very easy provided one uses an automated build system such
> as Gentoo Portage or Pauludis which will keep track of all dependencies.

Sounds more like using Gentoo and making grandiose claims about it than
maintaining a personal distribution.

--
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[Diego Garcia]

That statement was a deliberate test. Sophisticated people will be able
to see beyond those meaningless garnishments and grasp the true
meaning.

YOU failed.

YOU are probably 5% Linux and 95% Mickeysoft anyway.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 30/11/2021 19:42, Diego Garcia wrote:
> I devote about 30 minutes maximum each week in maintaining my custom
> "distro."

I devote less than 30 minutes a year.

--
“People believe certain stories because everyone important tells them,
and people tell those stories because everyone important believes them.
Indeed, when a conventional wisdom is at its fullest strength, one’s
agreement with that conventional wisdom becomes almost a litmus test of
one’s suitability to be taken seriously.”

Paul Krugman

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 01/12/2021 05:39, Aragorn wrote:
> when it came
> to systemd. But I studied it, I discovered its merits, and I
> decided to give it a chance.
>
> And now that I'm using it, I can find nothing about sysvinit that would
> ever make me want to go back to it. Besides, sysvinit is no longer
> being maintained — it's effectively abandonware — while systemd is.
> And you don't have to use all of it; you only use the parts that you
> like, and you disable and/or mask what you don't like.

Indeed. once maintenance switches from keeping sysvinit going and
transferring to finding all the issues Poettering was too arrogant to
fix himself, as with many other Great Mistakes (PostScript, X windows,
VHS and so on) it is easier to go with the sub optimal solution, simply
because it is at least being maintained.

--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.

[Dan Espen]

> There are other startup tools, [snip]

Really? That's the basis of your unwarranted condemnation of systemd?

I suggest you do like Aragorn has done. Study the design and come back
and tell us what you would do differently.

IMO, the design is near optimal.

Show us how your design (which doesn't use single flat files, one per
service) is better.

--
Dan Espen

[Diego Garcia]

On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 22:16:50 -0800, Bobbie Sellers wrote:

>
> There are other startup tools,
>

Indeed there are. But the mainstream distros, and their sheepish followers,
completely ignore them. Without recognition and support these alternatives
may just wither on the vine.

>
> I have never seen a
> Gnome since 2.4 that I liked.
>

GNOME is just another option among many other options.

But the problem -- and it is a VERY serious problem -- is that the
mainstream distros, and their sheepish followers -- act and believe
that GNOME is the only game in town. As a consequence everything
else is ignored by them.

I use FVWM3. It is a fantastic window manager and fulfills all of
my needs. But since libinput became the defacto input driver for
X, thanks to GNOME et.al., I have been having problems with mouse
scrolling (the problems are too complex to describe here.)

The short story is that the GTK+ folks won't even consider the issue
because they view GNOME, with its GTK+ foundation, to be the
only graphical environment that exists. For them there are no
alternatives to consider.

The same attitude is manifest at LibreOffice. They develop only
for GNOME/KDE and will dismiss anything else as belonging to a tiny
minority that is not worth their attention.

It is of course undeniable that IBM/RedHat has the goal of destroying
the variety within Linux in favor of unifying the interface with
systemd and GNOME. Their rationale is that more developers, and hence
more commercial applications, will be attracted to a nice, neat, and
unified interface.

Will this ever happen? It's not likely. Photoshop, AutoCAD, etc.
will never develop Linux versions, even with the butchery inflicted
by IBM/RedHat.

[Dan Espen]

Diego Garcia <d...@chaotic.info> writes:

> On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 22:16:50 -0800, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
>
>>
>> There are other startup tools,
>>
>
> Indeed there are. But the mainstream distros, and their sheepish followers,
> completely ignore them. Without recognition and support these alternatives
> may just wither on the vine.

Ridiculous.

I guess those distro makers weren't so sheepish when they abandoned
decades old sysvinit and moved to something demonstrably better.

--
Dan Espen

[Diego Garcia]

On Wed, 01 Dec 2021 09:38:59 -0500, Dan Espen wrote:

>
> I guess those distro makers weren't so sheepish when they abandoned
> decades old sysvinit and moved to something demonstrably better.
>

It sounds like the argument put forth by Steve Ballmer, of Mickeysoft
fame, that Linux is based a thirty-year-old OS known as Unix and is therefore
no good. (And lots of people were actually convinced!)

But I am not going to get sucked into a hopeless argumentative whirlpool
about systemd. GNU/Linux was made to be highly customizable and to fit
many different scenarios from supercomputers to toasters. As such,
to demand that GNU/Linux converge toward a single way of doing things
is preposterous.

[Diego Garcia]

On Wed, 01 Dec 2021 12:59:37 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

>
> I devote less than 30 minutes a year.
>

Congrats.

In exchange you get an OS that is semi-crippled with security features
and totally lacking in optimization and that performs at least 30% slower.

That may not be an issue for most but I would rather wait 3 hours
as opposed to 6 hours for my Povray animations to finish.

[Bobbie Sellers]

I don't have to show you anything to justify my personal opinion
based on my personal opinion. You as well don't have to show me
anything to justify your personal opinion.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 01/12/2021 15:15, Diego Garcia wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Dec 2021 12:59:37 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>>
>> I devote less than 30 minutes a year.
>>
>
> Congrats.
>
> In exchange you get an OS that is semi-crippled with security features
> and totally lacking in optimization and that performs at least 30% slower.
>

No, I don't. The operating system is faster than the applications I run
and the networks I run them over.

> That may not be an issue for most but I would rather wait 3 hours
> as opposed to 6 hours for my Povray animations to finish.
>

I simply spent about $300 on an old HP desktop to get that sort of speed
increase.

$300 of my time is only a few hours

--
"A point of view can be a dangerous luxury when substituted for insight
and understanding".

Marshall McLuhan

[Diego Garcia]

On Wed, 01 Dec 2021 16:09:08 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

>>
>> In exchange you get an OS that is semi-crippled with security features
>> and totally lacking in optimization and that performs at least 30% slower.
>>
>
> No, I don't. The operating system is faster than the applications I run
> and the networks I run them over.
>

You are totally missing the fun factor.

Wouldn't you want to be able to show off to your friends and acquaintances
the fabulous GNU/Linux machine that you built from scratch all by yourself?

Do-it-yourself projects are supremely enjoyable and rewarding and GNU/Linux
is the do-it-yourselfer's dream.

There is no thrill in using a totally "canned" and off-the-shelf distro.

[Bobbie Sellers]

There you are incorrect, To get Linux running however on a new machine
is a thrill. To see my installation boot-up every day is a
thrill. While it may take more to thrill you but each time I see my
login requested I am happier.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 01/12/2021 17:33, Diego Garcia wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Dec 2021 16:09:08 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>>>
>>> In exchange you get an OS that is semi-crippled with security features
>>> and totally lacking in optimization and that performs at least 30% slower.
>>>
>>
>> No, I don't. The operating system is faster than the applications I run
>> and the networks I run them over.
>>
>
> You are totally missing the fun factor.
>
> Wouldn't you want to be able to show off to your friends and acquaintances
> the fabulous GNU/Linux machine that you built from scratch all by yourself?
>

Did that about 30 years ago

> Do-it-yourself projects are supremely enjoyable and rewarding and GNU/Linux
> is the do-it-yourselfer's dream.

You have no idea. I spent a large part of my working life turning dead
hardware into working computers.

These days I just want the bastards to work. I've got better things to do

>
> There is no thrill in using a totally "canned" and off-the-shelf distro.

There is, if you are building custom applications on top

>


--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.
-- Yogi Berra

[mechanic]

On Wed, 1 Dec 2021 11:29:52 -0800, Bobbie Sellers wrote:

> To get Linux running however on a new machine is a thrill. To see
> my installation boot-up every day is a thrill. While it may take
> more to thrill you but each time I see my login requested I am
> happier.

That doesn't say a lot for the trust you have in your system!

[Diego Garcia]

On Wed, 01 Dec 2021 20:20:46 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

>
> These days I just want the bastards to work. I've got better things to do
>

> There is, if you are building custom applications on top
>

A true craftsman has a deep respect and admiration for the quality
of his tools.

Maybe you create just using toolkits, like Mickeysoft .Net, and
cannot fathom the intricate infrastructure?

[Diego Garcia]

On Wed, 01 Dec 2021 11:29:52 -0800, Bobbie Sellers wrote:

>
> To get Linux running however on a new machine
> is a thrill. To see my installation boot-up every day is a
> thrill. While it may take more to thrill you but each time I see my
> login requested I am happier.
>

Excellent!

Now your next step is to explore all of the configuration
possibilities and then begin to tweak and tweak and tweak.

Then read the many documents and tutorials available
on GNU/Linux fundamentals. Especially, the Linux From
Scratch documents will guide you.

After sufficient study, you will inevitably come to know
that GNU/Linux is quite tractable and that RedHat corruptions
like systemd are pure garbage.

Do not allow the blinded distro lackeys, who are abundant
on any forum, to influence your decision. These sheeple
do nothing other than freeload. They contribute nothing
beyond their own deluded bias.

Remember: GNU/Linux was created for computing freedom
and independence. Any distro that does not respect such
ideals should be shunned and buried.

[Bobbie Sellers]

I trust my system but I and my foolishness are harded to control.

[Bobbie Sellers]

On 12/1/21 16:35, Diego Garcia wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Dec 2021 11:29:52 -0800, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
>
>>
>> To get Linux running however on a new machine
>> is a thrill. To see my installation boot-up every day is a
>> thrill. While it may take more to thrill you but each time I see my
>> login requested I am happier.
>>
>
> Excellent!
>
> Now your next step is to explore all of the configuration
> possibilities and then begin to tweak and tweak and tweak.

No it is not. It is to be content with my circumstances
and not exhaust myself.

>
> Then read the many documents and tutorials available
> on GNU/Linux fundamentals. Especially, the Linux From
> Scratch documents will guide you.
>
> After sufficient study, you will inevitably come to know
> that GNU/Linux is quite tractable and that RedHat corruptions
> like systemd are pure garbage.

Of course it can be tractable. i have system tamed
by people who have been at it longer than I have, I spent
my efforts in the 80s and 90s on lesser equipment and while
what I learned is helpful to more people than myself now
as I approach the end of my life is not the time to worry about
creating my own system.

>
> Do not allow the blinded distro lackeys, who are abundant
> on any forum, to influence your decision. These sheeple
> do nothing other than freeload. They contribute nothing
> beyond their own deluded bias.

Oh over on the forum we have testers, coders, packagers and
poets. They know what they want and with a little bit of input they
produce fine work.

>
> Remember: GNU/Linux was created for computing freedom
> and independence. Any distro that does not respect such
> ideals should be shunned and buried.

The Ideal was that Linus should have a working Unix-like
system on a computer he could afford, And that the fellows working
on a Unix-like OS in the GNU organization could have a working
kernel. HURD is still brewing afaik. Linux was there,

My preference would have been to have an Amiga-like OS
that gave me a reliable experience. AmigaOS lacked memory
protection. I had spent the last few years before AmigaOS
folded learning every one of the limited commands that were
available.
Now my requirements matched those of Mandriva 2006
according to a friend now gone.
Eventually through a online friend, a Norwegian SysAdm,
I got copies of the Mandriva isos on DVD copied them to a cheap
laptop running XP and got them written to 6 CDs. I installed
them and it was not that much different than installing AmigaOS
from 6 floppy disks.
Mandriva and KDE won my hearts as I expored and adjusted
my configurations. Mandriva did not work for me after 2011 despite
my requests for assistance with it. I was pretty bummed out but
I started testing forks of it. Mageia would not boot on the
newer, more expensive laptop so I tried PCLinuxOS in 2014 or so.

[Aragorn]

On 02.12.2021 at 00:35, Diego Garcia scribbled:

> Then read the many documents and tutorials available
> on GNU/Linux fundamentals. Especially, the Linux From
> Scratch documents will guide you.
>
> After sufficient study, you will inevitably come to know
> that GNU/Linux is quite tractable and that RedHat corruptions
> like systemd are pure garbage.
>

> Do not allow the blinded distro lackeys, [...]

Ladies and Gentlemen, I think we've discovered the new Usenet identity
of the poster formerly known as "F. Russell" and "FR". And many
other identities before those.

Isn't that right, Alan Connor, oops, I mean, Diego? ;)

[stepore]

On 12/01/2021 02:21 AM, Diego Garcia wrote:
>> On 11/29/2021 03:40 PM, Diego Garcia wrote:
>>
>>> <snip> courtesy of
>>> the GNOME/freedesktop faggots, does this lunacy prevail.
>>>
>>
>> Intolerant. Hostile. Homophobic.
>>
>
> That statement was a deliberate test. Sophisticated people will be able
> to see beyond those meaningless garnishments and grasp the true
> meaning.
>
> YOU failed.

You made the statement. And I don't know you enough to recognize your
games. So, I see it as a your fail if it was a test. Besides, whether it
was or not, please feel free to take it back or apologize for it.

> YOU are probably 5% Linux and 95% Mickeysoft anyway.

Wrong again.

[Richard Kettlewell]

Aragorn <thor...@telenet.be> writes:
> On 02.12.2021 at 00:35, Diego Garcia scribbled:
>> Then read the many documents and tutorials available on GNU/Linux
>> fundamentals. Especially, the Linux From Scratch documents will
>> guide you.
>>
>> After sufficient study, you will inevitably come to know that
>> GNU/Linux is quite tractable and that RedHat corruptions like systemd
>> are pure garbage.
>>
>> Do not allow the blinded distro lackeys, [...]
>
> Ladies and Gentlemen, I think we've discovered the new Usenet identity
> of the poster formerly known as "F. Russell" and "FR". And many
> other identities before those.

I think you’re probably right. Obsessed with performance and
customization, hates the mainstream, doesn’t understand that not
everyone shares their hobby.

OTOH my impression of ‘F Russell’ is that they would have managed to
figure out the df issue at the top of the thread for themselves.

--
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[Harold Stevens]

In <20211202035030.59d80315@nx-74205> Aragorn:

[Snip ...]

> formerly known as "F. Russell" and "FR". And many
> other identities before those.
> Isn't that right, Alan Connor, oops, I mean, Diego? ;)

+1

Went sideways deja vu with me, from about their third post. Ergo
plonked pronto.

--
Regards, Weird (Harold Stevens) * IMPORTANT EMAIL INFO FOLLOWS *
Pardon any bogus email addresses (wookie) in place for spambots.
Really, it's (wyrd) at att, dotted with net. * DO NOT SPAM IT. *
I toss GoogleGroup (http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/).

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 01/12/2021 23:34, Diego Garcia wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Dec 2021 20:20:46 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>>
>> These days I just want the bastards to work. I've got better things to do
>>
>> There is, if you are building custom applications on top
>>
>
> A true craftsman has a deep respect and admiration for the quality
> of his tools.
>
> Maybe you create just using toolkits, like Mickeysoft .Net, and
> cannot fathom the intricate infrastructure?
>

No, I write HTML/CSS and JavaScript, C, PHP and mysql.

All I want is a stable implementation of apache, mysql and NFS file
share support.
Linux is not a tool, it is simply a stable workbench.

The tools are those languages.


--
“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere,
diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.”
― Groucho Marx

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

Le 30-11-2021, Diego Garcia <d...@chaotic.info> a écrit :

> On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 12:40:56 +0000, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Every user should have his own personal distro.
>>
>> That would be impractical for most users and a ridiculous waste of time
>> and effort for the rest.
>

> I devote about 30 minutes maximum each week in maintaining my custom
> "distro."

It's a lot of time.

> There is no real argument against doing this.

The argument is not against doing this, but against telling everyone
should do this. It's not the same.

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

Le 01-12-2021, Dan Espen <dan1...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> Diego Garcia <d...@chaotic.info> writes:
>
>> On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 22:16:50 -0800, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> There are other startup tools,
>>>
>>
>> Indeed there are. But the mainstream distros, and their sheepish followers,
>> completely ignore them. Without recognition and support these alternatives
>> may just wither on the vine.
>
> Ridiculous.

Yes.

> I guess those distro makers weren't so sheepish when they abandoned
> decades old sysvinit and moved to something demonstrably better.

And they not always switched directly from sysinitv to systemed.

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

Le 01-12-2021, Bobbie Sellers <bl...@mouse-potato.com> a écrit :
>
> I don't have to show you anything to justify my personal opinion
> based on my personal opinion. You as well don't have to show me
> anything to justify your personal opinion.

It's easier to insult the distro maintainer this way. As you have no
technical argument, you can refuse any technical argument the distro
maintainer could had when they switched.

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

Le 01-12-2021, The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> a
écrit :

> Poettering was too arrogant to fix himself,

You prove him right.

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

Le 02-12-2021, Aragorn <thor...@telenet.be> a écrit :
>
> Ladies and Gentlemen, I think we've discovered the new Usenet identity
> of the poster formerly known as "F. Russell" and "FR". And many
> other identities before those.
>
> Isn't that right, Alan Connor, oops, I mean, Diego? ;)

Let's say that I was wondering from a few messages.

The first real clue I had is: he's using Gentoo pretending it's
Linux From Scratch.

But he is a little bit to polite for me to be sure.

[Bobbie Sellers]

On 12/3/21 15:04, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
> Le 01-12-2021, Bobbie Sellers <bl...@mouse-potato.com> a écrit :
>>
>> I don't have to show you anything to justify my personal opinion

>> based on my personal *experience* You as well don't have to show me

>> anything to justify your personal opinion.
>
> It's easier to insult the distro maintainer this way. As you have no
> technical argument, you can refuse any technical argument the distro
> maintainer could had when they switched.
>

Technical arguments are based on facts. Show me a fact and
I will likely agree with you. I made an error apparently in my post
which I am correcting above between the asterisks.

My distribution is not a problem. So-called Diego Garcia has
a problem with all distributions he does not create. If he has the
time that is OK with me but trying out new kernelw and reporting to
my packager if the result are less than expected is something I
enjoy. I probably spend 30 minutes each day updating my computer
or figuring out why I cannot resolve a problem. Some days I
spend hours on that. Not the distribution's fault afaiac.

But i, unlike DG, enjoy having a full distribution at hand
in case I want to do something completely different from my usual
pastimes.

bliss - brought to you by the power and ease of PCLinuxOS
and a minor case of hypergraphia

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

Le 03-12-2021, Bobbie Sellers <bl...@mouse-potato.com> a écrit :
> On 12/3/21 15:04, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>> Le 01-12-2021, Bobbie Sellers <bl...@mouse-potato.com> a écrit :
>>>
>>> I don't have to show you anything to justify my personal opinion
>>> based on my personal *experience* You as well don't have to show me
>>> anything to justify your personal opinion.
>>
>> It's easier to insult the distro maintainer this way. As you have no
>> technical argument, you can refuse any technical argument the distro
>> maintainer could had when they switched.
>>
> Technical arguments are based on facts. Show me a fact and
> I will likely agree with you. I made an error apparently in my post
> which I am correcting above between the asterisks.

OK, the fact is there are two different subjects about systemd.

The first subject is about the quality of systemd in itself. If you
refuse to take into account this fact with technical arguments, the only
result is insulting the maintainers saying they are sheep unable to
chose the init system based on technical reasons.

The second subject is about gnome which need systemd to be used. If you
don't care about gnome you can get rid of systemd easily. And as it's
difficult for a maintainer to manage two init systems, one based on
systemd for gnome and one in which systemd could be replaced without
gnome, is difficult, so they only use systemd.

I agree, systemd is only an init system among others, it shouldn't be
mandatory. But it's the gnome way, not systemd way because, systemd
offere ways to used the old init scripts at the same time as its own
configuration.

> So-called Diego Garcia has a problem with all distributions he does
> not create.

He didn't create anything. He is using Gentoo believing he's using LFS.
Pretending he created it himself. And if he is FR in disguise, I'm not
even sure he's using Gentoo.

> I probably spend 30 minutes each day updating my computer
> or figuring out why I cannot resolve a problem. Some days I
> spend hours on that. Not the distribution's fault afaiac.

You do what you want, I have nothing against it, you will always learn
things in this way and it's never a bad idea to learn things. But I have
other priorities and I really don't have time to spend 30 minutes a day.

[Diego Garcia]

On Fri, 03 Dec 2021 20:44:47 +0000, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:

>
> The argument is not against doing this, but against telling everyone
> should do this. It's not the same.
>

But RedHat and the majority of distros literally forcing systemd
as the default is acceptable.

You advocate a strange double standard.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 03/12/2021 23:10, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
> Le 01-12-2021, The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> a
> écrit :
>> Poettering was too arrogant to fix himself,
>
> You prove him right.
>

Right to be arrogant? How so?

[Bobbie Sellers]

On 12/4/21 02:17, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
> Le 03-12-2021, Bobbie Sellers <bl...@mouse-potato.com> a écrit :
>> On 12/3/21 15:04, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>>> Le 01-12-2021, Bobbie Sellers <bl...@mouse-potato.com> a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> I don't have to show you anything to justify my personal opinion
>>>> based on my personal *experience* You as well don't have to show me
>>>> anything to justify your personal opinion.
>>>
>>> It's easier to insult the distro maintainer this way. As you have no
>>> technical argument, you can refuse any technical argument the distro
>>> maintainer could had when they switched.
>>>
>> Technical arguments are based on facts. Show me a fact and
>> I will likely agree with you. I made an error apparently in my post
>> which I am correcting above between the asterisks.
>
> OK, the fact is there are two different subjects about systemd.
>
> The first subject is about the quality of systemd in itself. If you
> refuse to take into account this fact with technical arguments, the only
> result is insulting the maintainers saying they are sheep unable to
> chose the init system based on technical reasons.

No I am sure that using systemd is essential to their employment.
Having been employed in the past I generally recognize
the benefits of being employed.

>
> The second subject is about gnome which need systemd to be used. If you
> don't care about gnome you can get rid of systemd easily. And as it's
> difficult for a maintainer to manage two init systems, one based on
> systemd for gnome and one in which systemd could be replaced without
> gnome, is difficult, so they only use systemd.

AntiX and MX both seem to do ok, PCLinuxOS goes on without it and it
has KDE, Mate, XFCE as well as Open Box, Enlightenment, Trinity
and others supposedly lighter weight Desktops. I use KDE myself,
I have used Gnome when testing distribution or helping LUG members
before Covid-19 restrictions went into place. I find it more and more
repulsive as it moves on. I did use Gnome 2.4 on Mandriva for a couple
of weeks before I went back to KDE. Puppy is not my choice but if
someone was hating on systemd they have done without it,

>
> I agree, systemd is only an init system among others, it shouldn't be
> mandatory. But it's the gnome way, not systemd way because, systemd
> offere ways to used the old init scripts at the same time as its own
> configuration.
>
>> So-called Diego Garcia has a problem with all distributions he does
>> not create.
>
> He didn't create anything. He is using Gentoo believing he's using LFS.
> Pretending he created it himself. And if he is FR in disguise, I'm not
> even sure he's using Gentoo.
>
>> I probably spend 30 minutes each day updating my computer
>> or figuring out why I cannot resolve a problem. Some days I
>> spend hours on that. Not the distribution's fault afaiac.
>
> You do what you want, I have nothing against it, you will always learn
> things in this way and it's never a bad idea to learn things. But I have
> other priorities and I really don't have time to spend 30 minutes a day.
>

That is correct I have what I want in my distro but I may be forced to
compile a printer driver in order to use my new printer.
One more thing to struggle with. If I wasn't 84 now I would greet the
struggle with greater vigor but it never hurts to stretch the brain
and learn new tasks. One of the many reasons I started ti use a
computer in the first place.

later

[Diego Garcia]

On Sat, 04 Dec 2021 10:17:24 +0000, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:

>
> The first subject is about the quality of systemd in itself. If you
> refuse to take into account this fact with technical arguments, the only
> result is insulting the maintainers saying they are sheep unable to
> chose the init system based on technical reasons.
>

Quality?

For a desktop workstation SYSTEMD is totally unnecessary and a severe
detriment as well.

If you cannot comprehend this basic technical fact then you are deluded.

For servers, systemd may be appropriate (I don't know because I know
only a little about server maintenance and I don't want know any more).

Anyone who believes that systemd is an improvement for desktop workstations
is, I am sorry to say, is an ignoramus fool.

This group is composed of distro lackeys. No one -- other than myself -- has
the technical competence to understand the folly, for a desktop workstation,
of systemd.

[David W. Hodgins]

On Sat, 04 Dec 2021 19:24:53 -0500, Diego Garcia <d...@chaos.info> wrote:
> For a desktop workstation SYSTEMD is totally unnecessary and a severe
> detriment as well.

False. systemd is more than an init system. It's a task management system that
happens to include system level tasks that were handled by sysvinit.

It makes it easy for a user to start applications in the background during
login, have them automatically restart on a failure (if desired), and stopped
on logout. Much easier to use in a multi desktop environment install than getting
each desktop environment to do the same.

Gnome has chosen to take advantage of those systemd user level services, simplifying
the work for them, which is why gnome requires systemd.

> If you cannot comprehend this basic technical fact then you are deluded.
>
> For servers, systemd may be appropriate (I don't know because I know
> only a little about server maintenance and I don't want know any more).

Most desktop installs include components normally associated with a server,
such as postfix, used by cron jobs to send their output to a user. With linux,
desktop work stations are servers. They just happen to have only one user who
uses local access.

> Anyone who believes that systemd is an improvement for desktop workstations
> is, I am sorry to say, is an ignoramus fool.

Then I'm glad you consider me to be an ignoramus fool. As the leader of the qa team
for Mageia linux, I've seen the difficulty developers/packagers had getting sysvinit
scripts to work properly, and not interfere with each other (especially the latter).

While learning how to use systemd properly takes time, just as learning sysvinit
did, it's much simpler to use, much more reliable, easier to troubleshoot and
customize. It's designed to be flexible.

Circular loops in requires for the sysvinit scripts will stop sysvinit system from
booting. With systemd, with such a loop, it will automatically break the loop, at
least allowing you to get to a login, to fix the problem.

> This group is composed of distro lackeys. No one -- other than myself -- has
> the technical competence to understand the folly, for a desktop workstation,
> of systemd.

I wasn't in favour of the switch from sysvinit to systemd at first. After I'd spent
some time learning how to use it, and realized it's benefits, I learned to prefer
it. At present Mageia packages still have some sysvinit scripts (handled by
systemd), but they are being replaced by systemd service files gradually.

All init systems require investing time to learn how to use properly. If you're
not willing to invest the time, then go ahead and stick with sysvinit, but stop
complaining about something just because you don't comprehend it's benefits.

Dave Hodgins

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

Le 04-12-2021, Diego Garcia <d...@chaos.info> a écrit :
> On Fri, 03 Dec 2021 20:44:47 +0000, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>
>>
>> The argument is not against doing this, but against telling everyone
>> should do this. It's not the same.
>>
>
> But RedHat and the majority of distros literally forcing systemd
> as the default is acceptable.

They have to chose a default, there are no other possibility. So,
they chose the best one available.

> You advocate a strange double standard.

You are comparing two different things. I'm not saying people have
to keep the default choice.

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

Le 05-12-2021, David W. Hodgins <dwho...@nomail.afraid.org> a écrit :
>
> False. systemd is more than an init system. It's a task management system that
> happens to include system level tasks that were handled by sysvinit.

You're right. And it's at the same time great and annoying. It's
annoying because it's supposed to be an init system and it does
things it shouldn't.

At the same time, as it's its purpose to launch other process, it's
the best place to follow them. So it makes sense to let it do things
which were difficult to do and needed.

> While learning how to use systemd properly takes time,

It's a real issue there. There are a lot of documentation, a lot of
stuff everywhere. But I have never found a learning path. Nothing
for the beginner to start at the beginning and progress until being
confortable. And it's a real chalenge for the beginner.

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

Le 04-12-2021, The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> a écrit :
> On 03/12/2021 23:10, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>> Le 01-12-2021, The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> a
>> écrit :
>>> Poettering was too arrogant to fix himself,
>>
>> You prove him right.
>>
> Right to be arrogant? How so?

Read again your sentence, read the attacks he has received and look
at what he has done. His only choice was to ignore the attackers and
move on.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 05/12/2021 13:03, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
> Le 04-12-2021, The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> a écrit :
>> On 03/12/2021 23:10, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>>> Le 01-12-2021, The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> a
>>> écrit :
>>>> Poettering was too arrogant to fix himself,
>>>
>>> You prove him right.
>>>
>> Right to be arrogant? How so?
>
> Read again your sentence, read the attacks he has received and look
> at what he has done. His only choice was to ignore the attackers and
> move on.
>

People politely reporting bugs to him in his code were not 'attackers'.
His arrogance, paranoia and narcissism might have made him *think* they
were.

Pulse audio is still far from a completed piece of work, but as you say,
he has 'moved on' and left other people to clean up his excrement



--
"Nature does not give up the winter because people dislike the cold."

― Confucius

[Carlos E.R.]

On 05/12/2021 14.16, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
> Le 05-12-2021, David W. Hodgins <dwho...@nomail.afraid.org> a écrit :
>>
>> False. systemd is more than an init system. It's a task management system that
>> happens to include system level tasks that were handled by sysvinit.
>
> You're right. And it's at the same time great and annoying. It's
> annoying because it's supposed to be an init system and it does
> things it shouldn't.

Who says it is supposed to be only an init system? :-D

>
> At the same time, as it's its purpose to launch other process, it's
> the best place to follow them. So it makes sense to let it do things
> which were difficult to do and needed.
>
>> While learning how to use systemd properly takes time,
>
> It's a real issue there. There are a lot of documentation, a lot of
> stuff everywhere. But I have never found a learning path. Nothing
> for the beginner to start at the beginning and progress until being
> confortable. And it's a real chalenge for the beginner.
>

Google: systemd howto for dummies

https://www.golinuxcloud.com/beginners-guide-systemd-tutorial-linux/
https://www.thegeeksearch.com/beginners-guide-to-systemd/

https://www.linux-magazine.com/Issues/2017/200/Tutorials-Systemd
https://journeymangeek.com/?p=157
And… systemd for dummies. Its not that terrible

https://bitlaunch.io/blog/a-beginners-guide-to-systemctl/

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Diego Garcia]

On Thu, 02 Dec 2021 08:30:04 +0000, Richard Kettlewell wrote:

>
> I think you’re probably right. Obsessed with performance and
> customization, hates the mainstream, doesn’t understand that not
> everyone shares their hobby.
>

Typical unsophisticated, tendentious humans.

They are more concerned with the MESSENGER rather than
the MESSAGE.

Other than Usenet, Hollywood tabloids are their usual fare.

[Diego Garcia]

On Thu, 02 Dec 2021 08:30:04 +0000, Richard Kettlewell wrote:

>

> Obsessed with performance and customization,
>

You fail to appreciate the semiconductor revolution. It has brought
the common man (i.e. me and you) unparalleled capabilities for
personal computing. No longer are we dependent upon paid CPU
cycles on some remote mainframe. Everything that can be done
digitally can be done on ones private desktop.

Performance is critical. That's why stuff like Intel's Math Kernel Library
exists (for GNU/Linux of course).

As I indicated earlier, I would prefer to wait 3 hours for my Povray animations
to finish rather that 6 hours (or 18 with a common distro).

[Diego Garcia]

On Sun, 05 Dec 2021 10:20:36 +0000, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:

>
> They have to chose a default, there are no other possibility. So,
> they chose the best one available.
>

Have to?

All distros should include all available options or else they get
out of the distro business.

But they are lazy and likely incompetent.

Just like most web sites only serve up pages designed for mobile
devices (because that's the majority) rather than use the standard
user agent string to determine the device and serve accordingly.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 07/12/2021 00.35, Diego Garcia wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Dec 2021 10:20:36 +0000, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>
>>
>> They have to chose a default, there are no other possibility. So,
>> they chose the best one available.
>>
>
> Have to?
>
> All distros should include all available options or else they get
> out of the distro business.

Obviously they don't get out of the distro business, which means they
know more about the distro business than you do :-P

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

Le 06-12-2021, Diego Garcia <d...@chaos.info> a écrit :
> On Sun, 05 Dec 2021 10:20:36 +0000, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>
>>
>> They have to chose a default, there are no other possibility. So,
>> they chose the best one available.
>
> Have to?

Of course. Whatever the choice there is always a default and it's a good
thing.

> All distros should include all available options

There are two issues with your point. First it implies all distros
should include systemd which is not what you are asking for. Second, if
an option is not good enough, every issue with it will become the issue
of the distro instead of the issue of the option's provider.

> or else they get out of the distro business.

The facts are against your claim. The most popular distros don't
propose any choice about the init system.

> But they are lazy and likely incompetent.

Far from it. Providing a robust distro usable by a lot of people in a
lot of ways require a lot of work and competence. But you are unable to
realize how customising an OS for only one personal computer is easier
to provide something way more broadly usable.

[Diego Garcia]

On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 21:28:46 +0000, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:

>
>> But they are lazy and likely incompetent.
>
> Far from it. Providing a robust distro usable by a lot of people in a
> lot of ways require a lot of work and competence. But you are unable to
> realize how customising an OS for only one personal computer is easier
> to provide something way more broadly usable.
>

Gentoo has been quite successful in this respect. It can accommodate
both mass preferences and personal preferences. Gentoo, and LFS,
offer both systemd and non-systemd configurations.

(Note: I use Gentoo only for automated building. Otherwise my system
is my own creation.)

Thus, YOU are the one who fails to understand.

Most GNU/Linux distros only PANDER to an assumed ignorant majority.
They will play the role of master to the user slaves.

Gentoo, and its equivalents like LFS, assume an informed and knowledgeable
user base. With Gentoo, and LFS, developers and users are on an equal footing.

Only idiots, like YOU, can be fooled.

[Carlos E. R.]

On 07/12/2021 00.30, Diego Garcia wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Dec 2021 08:30:04 +0000, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>
>>
>> Obsessed with performance and customization,
>>
>
> You fail to appreciate the semiconductor revolution. It has brought
> the common man (i.e. me and you) unparalleled capabilities for
> personal computing. No longer are we dependent upon paid CPU
> cycles on some remote mainframe. Everything that can be done
> digitally can be done on ones private desktop.
>
> Performance is critical.

Not to us. We have faster machines instead, easier and cheaper.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

Le 10-12-2021, Diego Garcia <d...@chaos.info> a écrit :
> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 21:28:46 +0000, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>
>>
>>> But they are lazy and likely incompetent.
>>
>> Far from it. Providing a robust distro usable by a lot of people in a
>> lot of ways require a lot of work and competence. But you are unable to
>> realize how customising an OS for only one personal computer is easier
>> to provide something way more broadly usable.
>
> Gentoo has been quite successful in this respect. It can accommodate
> both mass preferences and personal preferences. Gentoo, and LFS,
> offer both systemd and non-systemd configurations.

You believe what you want, but LFS and Gentoo are not used by the mass.
The users of Linux are something like 1 or 2 percents of all of the
computers' users. And of those little percentage, probably no more of
1 or 2 percent are using LFS and Gentoo. There is nothing close to a
mass preferences.

> (Note: I use Gentoo only for automated building. Otherwise my system
> is my own creation.)

We have not the same definition of one's own system creation. If you
want to go this road, for automatics reasons, I changed the mkarchiso
file to add a user able to be used with ssh and I made my own distro by
your standards. But unlike you, I'm not pretending anything about my
needs and the mass needs.

And by the way, I remember the last time you needed LaTeX to create a
pdf, you asked for help. So basically, your own distro is useless. It's
only purpose is to manage its updates.

> Thus, YOU are the one who fails to understand.

To understand what? That you are a daydreamer? Far from it.

> Most GNU/Linux distros only PANDER to an assumed ignorant majority.

Thanks to them, not to you, the mass can use Linux.

> They will play the role of master to the user slaves.

Really, you have no idea about the relation between the requesters of
solutions and the providers. When a payed system like Windows or MacOS
is not convenient, the users are complaining only to themselves. When an
opensource system doesn't fit the requirements, the users are asking
strongly for improvements.

> Gentoo, and its equivalents like LFS, assume an informed and knowledgeable
> user base. With Gentoo, and LFS, developers and users are on an equal footing.

Yes, so what? It's good for them.

> Only idiots, like YOU, can be fooled.

Fooled by what? I'm doing what I want with Archlinux. As I don't need
Gnome, it would be easy for me to switch from systemd to another init
system. But there is nothing better today, I don't want to switch to
something else. Maybe one day I will, but for now, I have no reason.

The same for LFS and Gentoo. For me LFS is interesting for educational
purposes, not for a day to day usage. And Gentoo can be good, but I see
no reason to switch for it, it wouldn't provide me anything I can get
right now.

The only distro I'm considering for a switch today is NixOS (or Guix for
the same reasons). It would be difficult, but it looks really
interesting.

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

But you are not really using you computer. If you passed half your
time compiling the updates of your distro, you would really need
performance.

[Helmut Achterberg]

That's the beauty of Linux. There is a distribution or platform for
just about every need. I use MXLinux / kde, but for my needs I could
easily switch to Ubuntu or LinuxMint or Slackware. I used Gentoo a
long time ago and found it very stable. The handbook was literally a
textbook education in Linux and I did indeed learn a lot.
Rather playing my dick is bigger than yours, we should embrace all
that Linux can do and choose the distro that works best for our
particular needs.
There is no "best" Linux.
And IMHO that is actually a good thing.


--
Helmut
"If you don't like Linux, you might tick incorrectly"

[Diego Garcia]

On Sat, 11 Dec 2021 22:13:54 +0000, Helmut Achterberg wrote:

>
> That's the beauty of Linux. There is a distribution or platform for

> just about every need ...

> There is no "best" Linux.
> And IMHO that is actually a good thing.
>

Is there?

It seems to me that the majority of distros have converged on
RedHat/Debian/systemd.

GNU/Linux, aside from Gentoo/LFS, no longer serves just about
every need.

GNU/Linux, however, still could remain free if not for RedHat and
its cohorts severely limiting choice.

An informed and sophisticated user base would vehemently rebel
but most GNU/Linux users nowadays are just looking for a "freebie"
(free as in beer) and couldn't care less about true software freedom.

[Diego Garcia]

On Sun, 05 Dec 2021 13:16:09 +0000, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:

> Le 05-12-2021, David W. Hodgins <dwho...@nomail.afraid.org> a écrit :
>>
>> False. systemd is more than an init system. It's a task management system that
>> happens to include system level tasks that were handled by sysvinit.
>
> You're right. And it's at the same time great and annoying. It's
> annoying because it's supposed to be an init system and it does
> things it shouldn't.
>

For a desktop workstation, the kind of scenario for which the personal
computer was originally developed, systemd is both totally UNNECESSARY
and a complete DETRIMENT.

Sure. The majority of global GNU/Linux installations are servers but that
does not mean that GNU/Linux is not good for anything else.

Any sophisticated GNU/Linux desktop workstation user will reject that
useless abomination known as systemd.

[Diego Garcia]

On Sat, 04 Dec 2021 21:39:39 -0500, David W. Hodgins wrote:

>
>> Anyone who believes that systemd is an improvement for desktop workstations
>> is, I am sorry to say, is an ignoramus fool.
>
> Then I'm glad you consider me to be an ignoramus fool. As the leader of the qa team
> for Mageia linux, I've seen the difficulty developers/packagers had getting sysvinit
> scripts to work properly, and not interfere with each other (especially the latter).
>

Both systemd and sysvinit are useless overkill for a desktop workstation.

The fact that you have not yet realized this simple truth makes Mageia (derived
from RedHat) highly suspect.

[Carlos E.R.]

We'll make our own choices, thankyou.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[J.O. Aho]

On 12/12/2021 00.39, Diego Garcia wrote:

> On Sat, 11 Dec 2021 22:13:54 +0000, Helmut Achterberg wrote:
>
>>
>> That's the beauty of Linux. There is a distribution or platform for
>> just about every need ...
>> There is no "best" Linux.
>> And IMHO that is actually a good thing.
>>
>
> Is there?
>
> It seems to me that the majority of distros have converged on
> RedHat/Debian/systemd.

There are a good number of distributions that do not use systemd, but
sure the most popularly used ones tend to use systemd.

> GNU/Linux, aside from Gentoo/LFS, no longer serves just about
> every need.

LFS I wouldn't class ass a distribution and the instructions do not
cover much of options.

Gentoo can be bent to many things, but do not serve all needs, for
example it lacks binary packages. The merit of Gentoo is the work they
done to make an up to date systemd-free system which has helped other
distributions and even the BSD community.

> GNU/Linux, however, still could remain free if not for RedHat and
> its cohorts severely limiting choice.

RedHat don't limit your freedom, you still can choose to build and
install your own init system and kernel, so you could in theory do a
systemd-free RedHat, just loads more to keep it up to date.

As long as you don't maintain a such version of RedHat and release it
for public use, I wouldn't call it a new distribution, it's just a
modified RedHat.


--

//Aho

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 12/12/2021 10:31, J.O. Aho wrote:
> There are a good number of distributions that do not use systemd, but
> sure the most popularly used ones tend to use systemd.

If the point of your distro is stability and longevity, the the fact
that there are a hundred plus programmers dashing behind Pöeterring with
poop scoops and plastic bags does tend to favour using what everybody
else is gradually making work.


Let's face is, Post Script and X windows were both designed by committee
to be far far more than was necessary, and are both massive examples of
creeping featurism and bloatware but have over the years been tamed to
become useable.

Systemd will in the end be made to work, not because it's good, but
because everyone decides to put effort into making it usable.


--
Labour - a bunch of rich people convincing poor people to vote for rich
people by telling poor people that "other" rich people are the reason
they are poor.

Peter Thompson

[J.O. Aho]

On 13/12/2021 12.51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> Systemd will in the end be made to work, not because it's good, but
> because everyone decides to put effort into making it usable.

Sadly systemd/Linux will be the one and only in the future, which also
will cause Linux programs no longer compatible with BSD.

--

//Aho

[Dan Espen]

On the face of it, this is a gross mis-representation of the situation.

Why is it sad that the _few_ Linux programs that interface with systemd
will not run without systemd?

--
Dan Espen

[Paul]

On 12/13/2021 6:51 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 12/12/2021 10:31, J.O. Aho wrote:
>> There are a good number of distributions that do not use systemd, but sure the most popularly used ones tend to use systemd.
>
> If the point of your distro is stability and longevity, the the fact that there are a hundred plus programmers dashing behind Pöeterring with poop scoops and plastic bags does tend to favour using what everybody else is gradually making work.
>
>
> Let's face is, Post Script and X windows were both designed by committee to be far far more than was necessary, and are both massive examples of creeping featurism and bloatware but have over the years been tamed to become useable.

PostScript wasn't designed by a committee, and in fact is
a nice design. It's an RPN language that uses a stack. It's
fully documented in the form of a book.

It was PDF, that started out with an intent, but got saddled
with parallel subsystems (JetForm). And also had attack surfaces
added to it (javascript, a movie player, and so on). It's PDF
that you should heap scorn on, because nobody but Adobe can
handle every possible feature in it. And it's because not
all the features in Adobe readers or editors are really PDF.
That's why they could make PDF an ISO standard and defend
their products at the same time. By just bolting stuff on the
side, that weren't really PDF.

On XWindows, you could continue to run your legacy applications
(like say Xeyes), without having to accommodate the lengthy list
of added subsystems. I don't see that as a problem. Where I have
a problem, is where something is not backward compatible and
breaks everything it touches.

If you wanted an example of rampant bustedness, that would be Python.
Any time I want to run some Python thing, my distro is just a
bleeding mess, and after a week of poking at it, I have to give up.

Paul

[Carlos E.R.]

Oh, but I know for a fact that the compilation of my distro is done on
servers that also run my distro (sometimes the commercial version). I
think it is done on virtual machines. I don't know the details, but I
think a fresh environment is created each time a package is built, so
that it sees only the declared packages needed for building.

And doing things with virtual machines needs much more resources and
power than doing it directly.

If the process is deemed slow, we moan for more and better CPUS and more
memory.

--
Cheers, Carlos.