[ art / civ / cult / cyb / diy / drg / feels / layer / lit / λ / q / r / sci / sec / tech / w / zzz ] archive provided by lainchan.jp

lainchan archive - /r/ - 278

File: 1492171484563.png (112.63 KB, 212x300, pokejojo.jpg)


I am mostly just parroting stuff that I heard...

So word on the street is...
SystemD is basically a red hat technology... I don't have to tell you how that is gobbling up everything in it's path.
Gnome is dominated by red hat employees.
Wayland also has roots in red hat...

Before Canonical went full Unity, they were kind of a counterweight to red hat. Novell is mostly doing nothing else than... existing(and I am kind of glad for that as they are a MS puppet). Arch and Gentoo are meme distributions. And Debian while it still sets the pace for its derivatives has also fallen for the SystemD joke.

How did this happen?


>Arch and Gentoo are meme distributions
There's that fuarrrking word again. It doesn't mean anything at this point.
What the hell do you mean? Could you explain your position on both distributions and why you dislike them like a normal human being instead of parroting buzzwords like a mindless sheep?


>meme distribution=DIY distribution


A company need be friendly user to be consumer friendly. To be a popular distro should be friendly user. Just do the math.


Hi, lainchan. Should I install linux instead windows 7 for more security?



My body is not too short, it is too fat.





> Why is Linux finally moving to standard systems after years of the user base asking for it?

The horror. Ubuntu listened to its users (and the users it lost).


This post is nothing about Ubuntu and all about the total presence of Red hat.



Sorry if I knee jerked, but I've only heard people raising these concerns after Canonical stepped away from Unity and Mir. Personally, I'm happy they abandoned upstart as well. I feel like all that was just going to cause more fragmentation and frustration.

I rather have more companies throwing their weight around within existing projects, rather than pulling a NIH with every project.

To answer your question, Canonical lost influence by going of on their own for everything. Ultimately I hope they become a counter weight to Redhat again now that they're back in the fold.


>> Why is Linux finally moving to standard systems after years of the user base asking for it?
This is pretty much it. Linux was in desperate need for some unification.
The solution they came up with, well, it is horrible, but so is the whole Linux ecosystem :-)
The emphasis has been for over a decade been placed in many things but Unix. Linux is a big player in the enterprise and commercial work now, and that means appealing to the white collars.
I don't like the principles behing systemd, but there are non-systemd alternatives (even non-GNU linux alternatives like alpine!) because of the nature of the project.
What I'm saying is: the nature of the project made necessary and it's target audience encouraged the approach taken by systemd, but it's nature also makes possible to use linux in many other ways. It's been an idea of mine using linux without any unix-style userland and instead make a userland of my own (I'm not up to the task yet though).
The point is that you are not forced to use systemd (or perhaps you are, at work! but work is not supposed to be pleasant anyway), it's not taking over your computer, unless you use a mainstream enterprise "user friendly" distribution.
Systemd is it's own thing, it will continue to grow, and it's taking over the commercial world like windows did with personal computing years ago. Just don't use it. There are alternatives.


The problem is that I have to go trough hoops to not use systemd.


What is a good distro without systemd? Slackware? Devuan sounds interesting, but I heard that it's not really ready yet to be used as a main operating system. Should I just give up and bend over for Lennart Poettering?



Gentoo probably. OpenRC is pretty good.


>Arch and Gentoo are meme distributions.
Arch and manjaro are great distros.
They're light, stable and have great documentation.


None of the BSDs have systemd.


The programming is where the money is at, because nothing gets stuff done like throwing money at it: "The top 10 companies, which employ kernel developers to contribute to the Linux kernel, make up nearly 57 percent of the total changes to the kernel" (https://www.linux.com/blog/top-10-developers-and-companies-contributing-linux-kernel-2015-2016). While this is for the kernel specifically, somehow I can't imagine that it is any different for other projects.

Redhat has money and programmers, so put them on a project, run with it and set an example. If something went well then all the other distros will kick into their line too.


What linux has always needed is some structure. Thats exactly what RedHat was trying to provide. They just completely failed at doing so.
Realistically linux is always going to be the unorganized mess that it is. There are just so many issues with it that will probably never be fixed. Most of them stem from the fact that most of the people who work on linux suffer from not invented here syndrome. But this itself was caused by the adoption of the GPL. Developers for linux get stuck in a position where if they don't reinvent the whell then there whole project will have to be released under the restrictive mess that is the GPL.

>DIY Distro
Which is exactly what arch isn't. You can't choose your init system, you can't choose your kernel, you can't choose your service manager. Besides partitioning your disks nothing about Arch is DIY.