back to article systemd-free Devuan Linux hits version 1.0.0

Devuan, the effort to build a systemd-free version of Debian, has released Devuan Jessie 1.0.0, a release candidate felt to be just about the finished article. In a mail sent to the project's followers the self-proclaimed “Veteran Unix Admins” behind Devuan say “This Devuan Jessie release candidate is as close as we can get to …

Page:

  1. conscience
    Thumb Up

    systemd sucks

    I'll be giving it a go right away.

    1. Ole Juul

      Re: systemd sucks

      I've got two units here running Devuan Jessie 1.0.0-beta2 which I installed a little while back. Works fine, and in fact it was easier to configure to my own taste than Debian is. In my world, Devuan is a winner.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: systemd sucks

        "in fact it was easier to configure to my own taste than Debian is"

        So it should be. That's what it was intended to do. I've also had the beta running on an Intel box but it was problematic on a Pi. I must go back to that now the RC is out.

    2. Planty Bronze badge
      Stop

      Re: systemd sucks

      Infighting sucks more, and has essentially killed Linux for mainstream adoption.

      1. jake Silver badge

        Re: systemd sucks

        Infighting? Nah. Just a little healthy sibling rivalry.

        Want mainstream? I'll bet you a plugged nickel that there are over twice as many Linux based devices than there are people in the town that you live in.

      2. Christian Berger

        It's not infighting

        It's loosing the respect of large projects. The whole point of unixoid operating systems is that they avoid large projects. The largest single project in the GNU/Linux environment, for example is the Linux kernel, and that's heavily guarded. It has to be, because even innocent mistakes can easily corrupt the system. Other projects are usually small and compact with well defined scopes. (Though many GNU projects have broadened those scopes a lot in recent years.)

        The idea is that the effort you need to put into software goes up exponentially when you add more lines of code. A 10k project is _much_more_ than 10 times as hard to write and maintain than a 1k project.

        The problem we have now is that there is a surplus of people who want to work in "Open Source". Those people want to write code for projects to have something for their resume. Helping on an existing project is easier than starting your own, and huge projects, like systemd, need lots of work. That's why they attract lots of learners and integrate their code. Code written by people in their early years usually sucks. In the past, that code would have gotten into shareware software and would have been erased by the bit rot of the Internet. Now those bad lines of code and those bad design decisions end up in actual Open Source projects which are stored for all eternity on Github.

        The result are bugs like this:

        https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/5644

        1. AntiSol

          Re: It's not infighting

          > The result are bugs like this:

          > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/5644

          OMG. And Pottering's response is particularly priceless, too, demonstrating both his ignorance and hubris in one succinct piece of prose: erasing the entire filesystem is "not much of a problem", and "this is a unix problem" (it isn't, as pointed out by multiple other commenters).

          I won't go near systemd on the simple basis that I know exactly how good Pottering's previous effort - pulseaudio - isn't. On the basis of having experienced that godawful dreck I'm not letting him anywhere near anything as critical as PID 1.

          1. Dan 55 Silver badge

            Re: It's not infighting

            And after it was shown it was a) bad behaviour and b) a regression, he locked the issue.

            And then some people wonder why systemd isn't liked...

            1. John Hughes

              Re: It's not infighting

              And after it was shown it was a) bad behaviour and b) a regression, he locked the issue.
              No, after the issue was fixed, and hordes of systemd haters came to whine for no reason, he locked the issue.

              Bug reporting tools are not discussion forums.

              1. Graham Dawson Silver badge

                Re: It's not infighting

                You very poorly characterise what actually happened.

                Immediately after the issue was fixed by someone else, he declares the issue wasn't a problem and demonstrates a profound ignorance of the basic utilities systemd is replacing. Several people then corrected his woefully poor understanding of how rm functions.

                If these are "haters" then I'm the fucking pope.

          2. Down not across Silver badge

            Re: It's not infighting

            OMG. And Pottering's response is particularly priceless, too, demonstrating both his ignorance and hubris in one succinct piece of prose: erasing the entire filesystem is "not much of a problem", and "this is a unix problem" (it isn't, as pointed out by multiple other commenters).

            That is just pure Poettering. As is his reaction to comments pointing out his ignorance:

            @poettering poettering locked and limited conversation to collaborators Apr 17, 2017

            PulseAudio. systemd.

            Each to their own, but I've seen enough that I won't touch any software that has anything to do with Poettering. Kind of like "Once is a chance, twice is coincidence, third time..."

            None of my Linux boxen have systemd (yes, I tried it, it can burn in hell). Luckily Centos 6 and Jessie are (or can easily be) systemd free. Looks like its time to give Devuan a try.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: It's not infighting

          Christian Berger wrote

          "The result are bugs like this:

          https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/5644"

          Thank you.

          Until now I've been just a mildly interested observer of this debate.

          However having seen the contributions from the man in question in the bug report in question, I

          (a) recommend anyone who hasn't seen them yet has a look at them (it won't take long)

          (b) draws their own conclusions (it won't take long)

          If any sensible person still thinks that the current incarnation of systemd is a bright idea after reading that, then I'll eat my hat.

          1. picturethis
            Mushroom

            Re: It's not infighting

            "https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/5644"

            (I encourage everyone to read this thread, really, it's not very long)

            OMG.

            Based on his response, I can't believe that anyone takes this guy (and systemd) as something that has made it beyond some dead-end fork, let alone in main stream OS's used in servers.

            Unbelievable.. The linux distro-world (using systemd) has gone to complete shit.

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: It's not infighting

          @Christian Berger - "The whole point of unixoid operating systems is that they avoid large projects."

          Apache is laughing at you right about now.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Facepalm

            @Andy

            "Apache is laughing at you right about now."

            Since when did Apache turn into a Unix(-like) operating system?

            Some larger projects covered by the Apache foundation may target Unix(-like) environments, but that doesn't mean that those Unix(-like) environments are also involved with those Apache projects as well.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: @Andy

              No one called Apache an OS. The question was if "large projects" are accepted into the GNU/Linux ecosystem. There are lots and lots of "large projects" associated with both BSD and Linux.

              1. Graham Dawson Silver badge

                Re: @Andy

                Which is why the post specified operating systems and not ecosystems. What an external application developer chooses to do is irrelevant. The closer you are to pid0, the closer you should stick to the Unix philosophy.

                1. cream wobbly

                  Re: @Andy

                  "The closer you are to pid0, the closer you should stick to the Unix philosophy."

                  Right. Such as not aliasing "rm" to "rm -i" and having patches contributed to nix beginner errors like "rm -r .*".

            2. cream wobbly

              Re: @Andy

              "Since when did Apache turn into a Unix(-like) operating system?"

              Fine. GNU, then.

          2. nijam

            Re: It's not infighting

            > Apache is laughing at you right about now.

            And that laughter is the reason why nginx is gaining ground.

            1. TheVogon

              Re: It's not infighting

              "And that laughter is the reason why nginx is gaining ground."

              And why Microsoft IIS now has double Apache's market share:

              https://news.netcraft.com/

              1. kosh

                Re: It's not infighting

                That's usage share, not market share. Markets are measured in dollars. IIS is light years ahead of Nginx in that regard.

                NB: There are revenues due to Apache, flowing to IBM and Oracle for their repackaging of it, but we don't have hard data.

                1. TheVogon

                  Re: It's not infighting

                  "That's usage share, not market share. Markets are measured in dollars. IIS is light years ahead of Nginx in that regard."

                  Uhm, no. Markets can be measured in various ways. Pounds for a start. And also not just by sales. Nice pedantry, but also wrong...

              2. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Microsoft IIS now has double Apache's market share:"

                O'Really? Here's the current market share *detail* for MS and Apache from https://news.netcraft.com/archives/2017/04/21/april-2017-web-server-survey.html

                Share of all sites: Apache 22% MS 44%

                Share of active sites: Apache 46% MS 8%

                Share of top million busiest sites: Apache 40% MS 10%

                Still think "MIcrosoft IIS now has double Apache's market share" is a plausible summary of Netcrafts numbers and charts or even the article text? It is the kind of misleading Twit-sized claim many politicians would happily make, though.

                Use the source, readers, always use the source:

                https://news.netcraft.com/archives/2017/04/21/april-2017-web-server-survey.html

                1. TheVogon

                  Re: Microsoft IIS now has double Apache's market share:"

                  "Share of all sites: Apache 22% MS 44%

                  Still think "MIcrosoft IIS now has double Apache's market share" is a plausible summary of Netcrafts numbers and charts or even the article text? "

                  Uhm, yes. I'm pretty sure 44 is exactly double 22...

                  This was always the exact statistic the Apache fans used to quote.

              3. Kiwi Silver badge

                Re: It's not infighting

                And why Microsoft IIS now has double Apache's market share:

                Maybe according to a quick glance at the linked Netcraft page (though I've edited this post to reflect another poster pointed out a better look at the Netcraft site shows otherwise). There's not many places out there that do this sort of work (with a quick check on Google anyway, others can look further if it's important enough to them)

                https://w3techs.com/technologies/details/ws-apache/all/all suggests otherwise.

                Site hacking must be at an all-time high. When IIS was just a teency little minnow with no defenses to speak of it was vastly more commonly hacked then Apache. Now it's a ugly large monster (still with no defenses to speak of, not like MS know what "security" is or anything) the number of targets out there is so much higher.

                (I must wonder who runs Netcraft, and how much of the IIS servers they see are MS spinning up a few million VM's just to fudge the data - but then MS has never been known to falsify data or reports before have they?)

                1. TheVogon

                  Re: It's not infighting

                  "Site hacking must be at an all-time high. When IIS was just a teency little minnow with no defenses to speak of it was vastly more commonly hacked then Apache"

                  IIS has always had a far better security record than LAMP stacks, and historically was about 4 time LESS likely to be hacked (allowing for market share at the time). See for instance http://zone-h.org/news/id/4737?zh=1

                  1. Kiwi Silver badge
                    Coat

                    Re: It's not infighting

                    IIS has always had a far better security record than LAMP stacks,

                    You'd be a comedian if your deluded trash wasn't on such a serious topic.

                    Why is it that IIS gets most of the hacks despite being least used? Can't claim something is more secure when it is less widespread but most broken.

                    How much do they pay you to spread this crap? And how do you go to sleep at night knowing that every time someone takes your advice they're putting their livelihood, and their customer's data at risk? Or are you trying to drum up business for yourself knowing that once people get sick of how broken and insecure MS crap is, you can drop in and sell them a nice secure LAMP system? Or perhaps something based on BSD?

                    Compared to MS, a house with no windows or doors in the worst neighbourhood is quite secure. (Must be, it has no windows! .. Yeah yeah, I'm outta here... )

                    1. TheVogon

                      Re: It's not infighting

                      "Why is it that IIS gets most of the hacks despite being least used? "

                      It doesn't - Linux gets WAY more hacked when used as an internet facing server. See http://zone-h.org/news/id/4737?zh=1 - old - but still true. More recent stats are actually worse for Linux!

                      1. Kiwi Silver badge
                        Boffin

                        Re: It's not infighting

                        See http://zone-h.org/news/id/4737?zh=1 - old - but still true.

                        We have a consumer protection TV show here in NZ called "Fair Go". It's been around since 1977. Basically they do two things, 1) people can write in with complaints about shoddy businesses or behaviour by people in private deals, and FG chases up the other side and works to either get the victims money back or get a "fair deal" arranged. And they've taken on the big insurance firms, telcos an goverment agencies and won, as well as people trying to rip of their neighbours and so on. And 2) they give people warnings about scams and information on detecting them. One thing they pointed out is a lot of scammers these days are using tricks to hide their true identity. One of them is not having real details in their domain registrations.

                        whois zone-h.org..

                        [..]

                        Registrant Email: ZONE-H.ORG@domainsbyproxy.com

                        [..]

                        So that is who you want us to look to for your proof of how good IIS is vs how bad Apache is? Someone organisation who is so trustworthy they use a domain hiding service so you can't find out anything about them?

                        Your garbage gets worse by the day. That stuff MS is feeding you really is messing up your brain!

                        1. TheVogon

                          Re: It's not infighting

                          "One thing they pointed out is a lot of scammers these days are using tricks to hide their true identity. One of them is not having real details in their domain registrations."

                          Had it occurred to you that might also be something those associated with website hackers might want to use? A very desperate sounding and failed attempt to cast aspersions...

                      2. Anonymous Coward
                        Anonymous Coward

                        Re: It's not infighting

                        "Linux gets WAY more hacked when used as an internet facing server."

                        Zone-h counts website defacements, doesn't it?

                        Is there a difference between a website defacement and what most people might call a hack?

                        "More recent stats are actually worse for Linux!"

                        Then share them please, if you don't mind. Ideally based on something more widely relevant than website defacements. I realise that may be hard work, but you're the one making the claims, you're the one that needs to put up or shut up.

                        Otherwise people may well just assume it's the same recycled Jeff Jones material you were spouting back in (e.g.) 2013 which itself was based on rather outdated source material.

                        This Jeff Jones:

                        https://blogs.microsoft.com/microsoftsecure/author/jeffjones/page/2/

                        Jeff Jones who was claiming in 2007 that, after a whole six months out in the wild, Vista was more secure than Linux and OS-X?

                        You'd be well advised to quote any more recent references you feel may clarify matters, but in the meantime here's one from 2007, from

                        http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2149851,00.asp

                        or there's this:

                        http://blogs.csoonline.com/windows_vista_6_month_vulnerability_report

                        Have a lot of fun.

                  2. Maventi

                    Re: It's not infighting

                    "and historically was about 4 time LESS likely to be hacked"

                    Simply because those mountains of outdated WordPress sites left to rot out there aren't running on IIS.

                    Context is everything.

                    1. TheVogon

                      Re: It's not infighting

                      "Simply because those mountains of outdated WordPress sites left to rot out there aren't running on IIS."

                      Sure - whatever excuse you want to make. IIS doesn't tend to be running insecure crap like PHP or My SQL either...

                      1. Maventi

                        Re: It's not infighting

                        "IIS doesn't tend to be running insecure crap like PHP..."

                        Case and point. So it's not Linux/Apache versus Windows/IIS security we are talking about per se; what we are really referring to is the plethora of quickly hacked up PHP apps and the like that become low-hanging bot fodder.

                        Saying that this is a 'Linux' issue is entirely missing the point; it's analogous to the folks that bag 'Java' as insecure without having any clue what they are actually referring to.

                        Unfortunately I guess this is the price to pay for a platform with such a low entry barrier.

              4. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: It's not infighting

                '...now has double Apache's market share...'

                If you read the full stats you linked to as opposed to cherry-picking one graph, it shows that Apache comfortably beats IIS in terms of actual use, and nginx is severely eating into the market share of both Apache and IIS. IIS actually shows a long downward trend in most of the graphs that isn't showing any signs of stopping. Take off the rose-tinted glasses and try scrolling down a bit.

                1. TheVogon

                  Re: It's not infighting

                  "If you read the full stats you linked to as opposed to cherry-picking one graph, it shows that Apache comfortably beats IIS in terms of actual use"

                  Uhm, no - if you read the article - you will see actual use is 44% IIS to 22% Apache.

                  This exact statistic is what the Apache fans always used to quote. It's only now that IIS is market leader that you are trying to cherry pick a more limited measure!

                  1. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: more recent stats @The_Vogon

                    Those "more recent stats" you promised to support your case... will we have to wait much longer?

      3. Brewster's Angle Grinder Silver badge
        Paris Hilton

        Authoritian dictatorships for beginners

        "Infighting sucks more,"

        You're Theresa May and I claim my free snap election.

        Paris, because she kinda looks like Theresa, if you squint.

    3. This post has been deleted by its author

  2. Gene Cash Silver badge

    Hm. Plain Debian still allows you to switch to SysV init in a matter of minutes, and in a couple years of that, I haven't found a problem except for Raspian, where the Bluetooth support assumes you have systemd.

    1. Sven Coenye

      It is not that clearcut

      Debian made KDE unnecessarily depend on systemd and without systemd, mounting/unmounting removable storage requires root permissions. While you can opt to not run systemd as PID 1, it is pretty much impossible to get rid of it without loss of functionality.

      1. Ole Juul

        Re: It is not that clearcut

        Too clever by half.

      2. jake Silver badge

        Re: It is not that clearcut

        To say nothing of the fact that systemd goes completely against the entire un*x design philosophy ... kinda like EMACS ;-)

        1. GrumpenKraut Silver badge
          Angel

          Re: It is not that clearcut

          > ... kinda like EMACS ;-)

          Wait, are you saying I should not be using /boot/vmemacs as O/S kernel?

          1. Graham Dawson Silver badge

            Re: It is not that clearcut

            Yes.

            It should be vi.

            1. jake Silver badge

              Re: It is not that clearcut

              No, no, no! Use vi as your shell! :-)

              From one of my passwd files:

              write:x:1007:101:,,,:/home/write:/usr/bin/vi

              Yes, that's really a user account that I use ... usually on a dumb terminal. I don't like distractions when I'm writing more than throw-away comments, like this one.

              1. GrumpenKraut Silver badge
                Coffee/keyboard

                Re: It is not that clearcut

                > write:x:1007:101:,,,:/home/write:/usr/bin/vi

                I am impressed. Let me guess: your version of vi does not support noob things like arrow keys?

                1. Brad Ackerman
                  Boffin

                  Re: It is not that clearcut

                  Let me guess: your version of vi does not support noob things like arrow keys?

                  Bonus points for implementing a device that sits between your VT102 keyboard (VT52 acceptable; VT220 is right out) and NOPs the arrow keys using 7400-series ICs and nothing else. Some people have an iron will, but if not it's okay to reinforce your determination with TTL logic and wire-wrap.

                  1. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: It is not that clearcut

                    Even more bonus points if said VT102 can dynamically switch between English and Icelandic and Arabic.

                    The real VT102 (and later VT220's) could do that.

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020