Of course this goes to a General Resolution

Posted Feb 12, 2014 1:13 UTC (Wed) by dlang (guest, #313)
In reply to: Of course this goes to a General Resolution by vonbrand
Parent article: The Debian technical committee vote concludes

it's more than just the shrill extremests. the statements from LP accusing people who don't move to systemd of causing fragmentation of linux are an example of the problem.

Of course this goes to a General Resolution

Posted Feb 12, 2014 1:51 UTC (Wed) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458) [Link] (11 responses)

Source, please? I've read a lot by Lennart, but I don't remember any such comment.

Of course this goes to a General Resolution

Posted Feb 12, 2014 2:06 UTC (Wed) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (10 responses)

I'm pretty sure that I say this in his G+ posts, but I don't bookmark such things just in case someone asks for a reference sometime in the future.

Of course this goes to a General Resolution

Posted Feb 12, 2014 2:32 UTC (Wed) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458) [Link] (4 responses)

So this is just another myth. Just as I thought.

Of course this goes to a General Resolution

Posted Feb 12, 2014 2:37 UTC (Wed) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (3 responses)

more insults, why am I not surprised.

Of course this goes to a General Resolution

Posted Feb 12, 2014 2:42 UTC (Wed) by rodgerd (guest, #58896) [Link] (2 responses)

You have a very broad definition of insults when pointing out that you've failed to substantiate a personal attack with evidence counts as an insult.

Of course this goes to a General Resolution

Posted Feb 12, 2014 2:56 UTC (Wed) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (1 responses)

Where did I make a personal attack? saying that LP has called distros that won't switch to systemd responsible for fragmenting linux could be mistaken, but it's hardly a personal attack.

Of course this goes to a General Resolution

Posted Feb 12, 2014 9:28 UTC (Wed) by xav (guest, #18536) [Link]

The lack of "-1 Troll, -1 Flamebait" in the LWN 'forum' starts to be painful.

Of course this goes to a General Resolution

Posted Feb 12, 2014 3:02 UTC (Wed) by hadrons123 (guest, #72126) [Link] (4 responses)

If you want to accuse someone you better have some evidence. Since its G+, I guess it would not be hard to search either.

Of course this goes to a General Resolution

Posted Feb 12, 2014 3:27 UTC (Wed) by neilbrown (subscriber, #359) [Link] (3 responses)

Not hard, but not trivial.

I found

https://lwn.net/Articles/534443/

Which is dlang making a similar statement about a year ago but with specific reference to Ubuntu, and

https://archive.fosdem.org/2013/interviews/2013-lennart-p...

which contains

> However, one of our other goals was to unify the fragmented Linux landscape, reducing the various lower-level differences between the distributions, and I guess we only partially succeeded with that. We did not convince the Ubuntu folks that systemd and unification was a worthy goal, and we certainly have to take (at least partial) blame for that.

which relates fairly well to the earlier statement by dlang (less well to the recent one).

So it seems that Lennart certainly did connect the ideas of not using systemd with fragmenting the Linux landscape (or at least: not unifying it). This example isn't exactly an accusation though. Maybe my google-fu isn't up to finding the actual accusation.

Of course this goes to a General Resolution

Posted Feb 12, 2014 3:42 UTC (Wed) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458) [Link]

I'm sorry, but "we hope to reduce fragmentation" sounds far from accusing others of actively fragmenting Linux. Lennart might be quite abrasive at times, highly convinced that he is right (and for the fury of his opponents, he has the nerve to be right most of the time), absolutely opposed to compromising what he works on, but not trying to force anybody. Besides, it is free software. Don't like it? Fork it, write your own, or use something else.

Of course this goes to a General Resolution

Posted Feb 12, 2014 19:18 UTC (Wed) by suy (guest, #81959) [Link]

The quote says "WE certainly have to take (at least partial) blame". How that is an accusation?

Of course this goes to a General Resolution

Posted Feb 14, 2014 11:32 UTC (Fri) by smurf (subscriber, #17840) [Link]

> So it seems that Lennart certainly did connect the ideas of not using systemd with fragmenting the Linux landscape (or at least: not unifying it)

Precisely -- "not unifying" is the keyword here. Who the hell needs three different locations for startup scripts, with different boilerplate function libraries, support like start-stop-daemon present or not; multiple possible locations for /etc/hostname, let alone how to set it without rebooting …

… I'd have to agree with Lennart that there are better (and more productive) ways for Linux distributions to be distinctive than how to do things like that.

Of course this goes to a General Resolution

Posted Feb 12, 2014 18:05 UTC (Wed) by HelloWorld (guest, #56129) [Link] (4 responses)

> the statements from LP accusing people who don't move to systemd of causing fragmentation of linux are an example of the problem.
Given the current state of affairs where pretty much every major distro has switched or will switch to systemd, it is a *fact* that distros who don't adopt systemd are causing fragmentation. This is not a matter of opinion any longer. What is a matter of opinion is whether this fragmentation is good or bad. I think it's bad, and so does Lennart Poettering, and that's his prerogative and you shouldn't flame him for doing that.

Of course this goes to a General Resolution

Posted Feb 12, 2014 22:38 UTC (Wed) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (3 responses)

He has the right to his opinion, but him pushing for all distros to use systemd means that the mantra "just change what distro you use if you don't like systemd" is a false one. The systemd proponents are going to keep applying whatever pressure they can to get all distros to switch (in part by pretending that everyone else already has, see the embedded discussion for examples)

Of course this goes to a General Resolution

Posted Feb 13, 2014 1:33 UTC (Thu) by HelloWorld (guest, #56129) [Link] (2 responses)

> He has the right to his opinion, but him pushing for all distros to use systemd means that the mantra "just change what distro you use if you don't like systemd" is a false one.

Just what are you talking about? How is he pushing anybody? How are those systemd proponents you're talking about applying any pressure? What means do they even have? The only thing that Poettering does to make people use systemd rather than the alternatives is to make sure it works better than they do. This isn't called “pressure” or “pushing”, it's called “doing a great job”.

Of course this goes to a General Resolution

Posted Feb 13, 2014 13:01 UTC (Thu) by Zack (guest, #37335) [Link] (1 responses)

> How are those systemd proponents you're talking about applying any pressure?

Hounding everyone who doesn't agree a 100% with them whenever the subject comes up ?

> What means do they even have?

Apparently an infinite amount of time and a frightening amount of zeal.

> The only thing that Poettering does to make people use systemd rather than the alternatives is to make sure it works better than they do.

Alternatively, maybe systemd just convinced some that it works better by specifically catering to their needs. Then these "some"--comfortable in their majority--are so convinced they're on the side of righteousness and that they're part of the "one true way" forward that they will gladly and incessantly confront any undesirables with their erroneous ways and deviant thinking.

In short: systemd does nothing for me technically, and socially its track record is a trainwreck. I don't want to go near systemd for the same reason I don't want to go near OpenBSD; the development culture is just so different from what I'm used to that I want to stay as far away from it as possible. Now if only systemd would extend the same courtesy towards me, but apparently that's not a possibility; optional compliance doesn't seem to be on the roadmap forward.

Of course this goes to a General Resolution

Posted Feb 13, 2014 13:52 UTC (Thu) by HelloWorld (guest, #56129) [Link]

Sorry, you anti-systemd trolls just keep repeating the same lies over and over and over again. Systemd isn't being forced on anybody, because the systemd supporters don't have any means to do that. And these...
> Apparently an infinite amount of time and a frightening amount of zeal.
...aren't means to force anybody to do anything. Maybe to annoy them on the internet, but then it's really simple to avoid that: just stay out of the discussion entirely. I certainly wouldn't be writing this if you hadn't spread false accusations and lies about systemd and its developers and supporters.

In fact, it's the other way around: it's people like *you* who would like to force people like the gnome and Debian developers to continue to maintain and support software stacks that they themselves consider obsolete. Luckily, just like the systemd developers, you don't have any means to do that.