Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 40

Thread: upstart, systemd, Canonical and Debian

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Bombay
    Beans
    5,925
    Distro
    Lubuntu 14.04 Trusty Tahr

    upstart, systemd, Canonical and Debian

    I came across
    Debian May Be Leaning Towards Systemd Over Upstart and
    Debate initsystem upstart and
    Debate initsystem systemd

    There's reference to Canonical's "contributor license agreement" as one obstacle, if that is an appropriate word, to upstart's acceptance. Why is that?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Beans
    1,582

    Re: upstart, systemd, Canonical and Debian

    Phoronix is fun, but that doesn't mean their analysis is reliable. They amp up trivial disagreements in earthshaking click-magnets.
    Don't fall for their hyperbole.

    I expect the Debian debate over systemd vs Upstart to go on much longer. It requires a consensus, and I predict no consensus in the next couple years. In the absence of consensus, Debian will either make no change at all, or do a change that tries to please everybody (including Ubuntu). Debian's governance is specifically set up to encourage inaction when there is a lack of consensus.

    And, honestly, it's not a big deal for Ubuntu. The conversion from sysvinit to Upstart is already part of the Debian to Ubuntu sync each release cycle. The ecosystem of Upstart patches are already written and in place. Consequently, the Ubuntu Technical Board has said that they won't turn away from Upstart without a compelling reason. Both Upstart and all those Ubuntu Upstart job patches are fully open source and GPL and available in Launchpad.

    The claim that the CLI is the big showstopper to universal Upstart acceptance has a bit of merit, but is mostly hyperbole. Sure, some contributors have heartburn about the CLI, and that's totally understandable. However, if the CLI vanished tomorrow, many of the same opponents have other reasons to dislike Upstart - it changes their favorite syntax, they don't like the name, they don't like the Upstream project, it abuses their favorite kernel module, it reminds them of a bad breakup, whatever. It's opinion. Opinions in this community are sometimes based on reason, but often based on emotion and politics. And that's okay.

    The real news is that Debian has two great open-source sysv init replacements available. And no real compelling need to choose between them soon. This is certainly not the precursor to an implied (and purely imaginary) Debian-Ubuntu divorce.
    Last edited by ian-weisser; January 18th, 2014 at 04:29 AM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Hamunaptra
    Beans
    624
    Distro
    Ubuntu Studio

    Re: upstart, systemd, Canonical and Debian

    I have no clue about what the nittigritties of this means to me, or if & how it will affect me, But

    Quote Originally Posted by ian-weisser View Post
    I expect the Debian debate over systemd vs Upstart to go on much longer. It requires a consensus, and I predict no consensus in the next couple years. In the absence of consensus, Debian will either make no change at all, or do a change that tries to please everybody (including Ubuntu). Debian's governance is specifically set up to encourage inaction when there is a lack of consensus.

    The real news is that Debian has two great open-source sysv init replacements available. And no real compelling need to choose between them soon. This is certainly not the precursor to an implied (and purely imaginary) Debian-Ubuntu divorce.
    one of the many reasons I just like Debian. Specially "Debian's governance is specifically set up to encourage inaction when there is a lack of consensus."
    bhatta

    May the Source be with you !
    Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazg gimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh
    'Buntu-ishi krimpatul !

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Manchester
    Beans
    2,082
    Distro
    Ubuntu Studio 13.04 Raring Ringtail

    Re: upstart, systemd, Canonical and Debian

    CLA would mean that Canonical would not accept any patches from Debian (assuming debian devs did not want to sign it). Debian could still make changes and maintain a branch that used those changes. That means its a little bit more maintenance work for Debian (not much in the age of distributed version control). Its much more of a loss for Canonical/Ubuntu because they can't use the nice fixes and changes that Debian make.

    The overall structure of events versus dependencies and support for none linux kernels is more likely to decide the issue.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Bombay
    Beans
    5,925
    Distro
    Lubuntu 14.04 Trusty Tahr

    Re: upstart, systemd, Canonical and Debian

    Quote Originally Posted by vasa1 View Post
    ...
    There's reference to Canonical's "contributor license agreement" as one obstacle, if that is an appropriate word, to upstart's acceptance. Why is that?
    It seems that CLAs are being discussed elsewhere with very interesting comments here: https://plus.google.com/111049168280...ts/NstZfwXbAti and some of the names seem to be respectable.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Beans
    1,582

    Re: upstart, systemd, Canonical and Debian

    Quote Originally Posted by vasa1 View Post
    It seems that CLAs are being discussed elsewhere with very interesting comments here: https://plus.google.com/111049168280...ts/NstZfwXbAti and some of the names seem to be respectable.
    And lots of the same-old-flamebait retreads, too. By respectable names.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Bombay
    Beans
    5,925
    Distro
    Lubuntu 14.04 Trusty Tahr

    Re: upstart, systemd, Canonical and Debian


  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    EU - UK
    Beans
    3,323
    Distro
    Ubuntu 12.04 Precise Pangolin

    Re: upstart, systemd, Canonical and Debian

    Actually, Canonical vs Red Hat, again..

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Beans
    1,370
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: upstart, systemd, Canonical and Debian

    This is a discussion about something that ought to be invisible to users in normal day-to-day use. Regardless of the init system used, developers could expose it to users via a GUI. Whether they should do that is very debatable because relatively few users know enough to reliably identfy services they do not need, much less recognize them by name. Distribution pacakgers should just avoid starting services that aren't approriate to the installed envirionment.

    Meanwhile, anyone holding out hopes for One Universal Approach to rule all of Linux is, as usual, engaging in wishful thinking. It won't happen. It shouldn't happen. Slavish adherence to standards blocks innovation.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Beans
    1,323

    Re: upstart, systemd, Canonical and Debian

    It's definitely Redhat vs the rational Linux world.

    There has been a very hot set of threads on this on Gentoo forums. Systemd is a travesty. A service, especially an init service, should do exactly one thing and do it really well. Systemd is trying to be lots of things.

    The biggest problem in my opinion is the way it's being promoted. Throughout the history of Open Source, some group writes a component, people start using it and it slowly gains traction based on how good it is in relation to everything else that performs the same service. Projects/apps are born, mature, age and die based on their usefulness, and they're pretty much interchangeable because they all do one thing, no problem.

    This time, Redhat made systemd and it does lots of things, people are starting to make their apps depend on it specifically and they're basically trying to force it down everyone's throats.

    I haven't looked much at Canonical's offering, but it can't be much worse than systemd. The whole point of Open Source is that we should be able to use what we want. It doesn't matter much with a binary distro as far as the end user is concerned but it DOES matter when it comes to new distros or any source-based distro.
    Help stamp out MBR partition tables. Use GPT instead!

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •