Debian considering going systemd init only

freemedia2018 · 2019-12-09 05:03:37

ToxicExMachina wrote:

It's not a good time for switching to non-linux OS. The greatest libre software environment need concentrated support of every user - not escape to weak freedom. It's better to prepare to fork Linux. I sure a lot of significant developers will support the fork.

im totally fine with people exploring bsd as a form of research. id like to hear what they find.

what i dont think is that its a sound political move. there was never a point in bsd history where they werent working with one corporation or another. the notion of bsd independence seems like pure mythology to me, though it wouldnt take any effort to convince me that there are a few facts, only that they add up to much.

we worry (and probably should worry) about intel or microsoft putting freely-licensed code in our init because we dont like its purpose. but many of us welcome non-free code that runs in kernelspace when we dont even know its purpose.

when it comes to the latter, the bsd ecosystem is already worse than ours. ive noted at least one effort to fix that-- libertybsd, but other than as research i think bsd is a step backwards. which youre very welcome to take but i question the logic of it-- i dont question the motivation, i can understand that perfectly well and i sympathise. if you do switch to bsd, at least come back and tell us what you learn. i tried it right before switching to devuan in 2015 and i think bsd is extremely interesting.

ToxicExMachina · 2019-12-09 05:10:20

sgage wrote:

What is wrong with LP? Does he really have Linus-envy, and want to have his own Lennax? Why can't he just stop? I have a bad feeling about this...

He is just doing what his masters say him to do. Without corporate support he is just another tech-hipster unable to make anything really useful. There are a hundreds or even thousands of similar persons. Corporations gave him a dog house at yard so he's doing everything to make them happy. Of course, it's also about "Look! I am honored to be a part of something big! You are inferior and worthless maggots! I am greater than all of you!". Corporations give him bones (money for conference, ability to demonstrate his position, etc.) and he thinks it's good.

yeti · 2019-12-09 05:12:20

ToxicExMachina wrote:

It's not a good time for switching to non-linux OS. The greatest libre software environment need concentrated support of every user - not escape to weak freedom. It's better to prepare to fork Linux. I sure a lot of significant developers will support the fork.

There is no "one size fits all"!
And diversity is a good thing!
And the BSDs sure are an alternative and the BSD license is even more freedom than the dimension GPL gives.

Please tell what you do and why but don't tell others what to do or not to do.

Thanks!

ToxicExMachina · 2019-12-09 05:19:51

freemedia2018 wrote:

ToxicExMachina wrote:
It's not a good time for switching to non-linux OS. The greatest libre software environment need concentrated support of every user - not escape to weak freedom. It's better to prepare to fork Linux. I sure a lot of significant developers will support the fork.
im totally fine with people exploring bsd as a form of research. id like to hear what they find.
what i dont think is that its a sound political move. there was never a point in bsd history where they werent working with one corporation or another. the notion of bsd independence seems like pure mythology to me, though it wouldnt take any effort to convince me that there are a few facts, only that they add up to much.
we worry (and probably should worry) about intel or microsoft putting freely-licensed code in our init because we dont like its purpose. but many of us welcome non-free code that runs in kernelspace when we dont even know its purpose.
when it comes to the latter, the bsd ecosystem is already worse than ours. ive noted at least one effort to fix that-- libertybsd, but other than as research i think bsd is a step backwards. which youre very welcome to take but i question the logic of it-- i dont question the motivation, i can understand that perfectly well and i sympathise. if you do switch to bsd, at least come back and tell us what you learn. i tried it right before switching to devuan in 2015 and i think bsd is extremely interesting.

This is the reason why I say that BSD are best friends of proprietary software companies. In fact BSD was created not for freedom - it was initially created to help proprietary software development on the educational and academic basis. The main principle of BSD don't let it to become technically superior than proprietary software. So forking Linux will be much more preferable way than switching to obviously less developed BSD.

ToxicExMachina · 2019-12-09 05:25:31

yeti wrote:

ToxicExMachina wrote:
It's not a good time for switching to non-linux OS. The greatest libre software environment need concentrated support of every user - not escape to weak freedom. It's better to prepare to fork Linux. I sure a lot of significant developers will support the fork.
There is no "one size fits all"!
And diversity is a good thing!
And the BSDs sure are an alternative and the BSD license is even more freedom than the dimension GPL gives.
Please tell what you do and why but don't tell others what to do or not to do.
Thanks!

Linux is not about "one size fits all". Linux is about "make your won solution".

At a large scale BSD gives much less freedom than GPL. GPL gives freedom (GNU/Linux) - BSD mostly harms freedom (Orbis OS from Sony PS4 is FreeBSD, Intel ME spyware is Minix, etc.).

In total: BSD is not an alternative. BSD is the same corporate doghouse as SystemD. Now GNU/Linux is the only OS capable to fight with proprietary systems.

Last edited by ToxicExMachina (2019-12-09 05:26:36)

freemedia2018 · 2019-12-09 06:28:23

ToxicExMachina wrote:

BSD was created not for freedom - it was initially created to help proprietary software development

i take the history of this stuff about as seriously as a non-expert can, and ive spent some time working on a timeline, so i want to correct this.

until 1980, software wasnt copyrightable in the usa (where both bsd and the gpl are from) and thus the notion of "software freedom" had little reason to exist before the 80s.

bsd started in the 1970s, with work on 1bsd beginning in 74 and 2bsd being released in 79. so im not sure its fair to say it "was created not for freedom" or possible to say "it was initially created to help proprietary software development" although the first full bsd system did come out in 1983.

its true that gnu is most likely the first operating system created specifically to advance software freedom though. and i think its unlikely that there will be a better option in the near future, though im still in favour of people exploring options.

ToxicExMachina · 2019-12-09 10:37:53

freemedia2018 wrote:

until 1980, software wasnt copyrightable in the usa (where both bsd and the gpl are from) and thus the notion of "software freedom" had little reason to exist before the 80s.
bsd started in the 1970s, with work on 1bsd beginning in 74 and 2bsd being released in 79. so im not sure its fair to say it "was created not for freedom" or possible to say "it was initially created to help proprietary software development" although the first full bsd system did come out in 1983.

Original BSD was proprietary software. Later it was licensed under the terms today known as 4-clause BSD License. This license was necessary only for academic research grants. It has nothing to do with freedom. Later BSD licenses were also made not for freedom - some clauses were removed because they caused some serious disadvantages.

freemedia2018 wrote:

its true that gnu is most likely the first operating system created specifically to advance software freedom though. and i think its unlikely that there will be a better option in the near future, though im still in favour of people exploring options.

BSD is still not an alternative. If BSD will have dominant share in the field of libre software it will be greatest catastrophe for community because every proprietary software developer will take it to make technically better but proprietary solution. This is the end of progress. The better option is to fork Linux and reorganize it into community maintainable project. Now it's optimized for corporate invasion. Community made most of Linux. There is no reason for rejecting this code.

Camtaf · 2019-12-09 10:40:53

If I'm not mistaken, 'unix' started out at AT&T as part of their phone system, but was made available to others, for a price, which then became Unix in its various forms.

BSD was a free version of unix, maintained by Berkley University, who had improved it no end, & was giving it away freely, until law makers/upholders got involved, as the kernel & a few other files were still in copyright.

This is where the GNU software came from, all but the kernel & a couple of files, which had to be replaced over time, to make BSD totally free, to distribute, alter, & use, as long as the Berkley copyright files were distributed with each copy.

I believe you will also find that the internet is run on BSD.

Last edited by Camtaf (2019-12-09 10:43:36)

freemedia2018 · 2019-12-09 12:30:16

ToxicExMachina wrote:

The better option is to fork Linux and reorganize it into community maintainable project. Now it's optimized for corporate invasion.

we are on the same page there, not only do i think a fork of linux is the better option, its the more likely one (better hardware support) but i still question how the original bsd was "proprietary software."

because of the license? as the software was not copyrightable, the only ways to make the software "proprietary" was to deny public access to source code (this wasnt done, afaik) and to try to use ndas or trade agreements (this wasnt done, afaik) since once someone had access they could already do what they wanted with it.

there was no reason to put the code under a license that said you could do what you could already do without one. bsd didnt exist until 74, and in 1972 gottschalk v. benson had made it extremely difficult to patent software, so there wasnt really that issue to contend with.

but the main reason that i tell people that a linux fork is the most likely solution (the reasons its most likely being related to suitability-- but rather the reason that i bother saying it) is so they dont put false hope into bsd over this. by all means check it out, but dont be surprised (or disheartened) that its the linux fork that comes up again and again-- the advantages to bsd (for this) are smaller and its a far less likely option from a technical standpoint. and i think the political advantages of switching to bsd are mostly imaginary.

Nili · 2019-12-09 14:09:15

ChuangTzu wrote:

Well, before completely jumping the Linux ship....there is Slackware (or SalixOS)which has remained true to *nix standards while everyone else forked off.

Thanks for the suggestion ChuangTzu, I've thought about it for a while, I've checked a bit on my early distro-hops and i regret that I didn't devoted enough time to the oldest (i think one of the true Linux distro around) i should have used more. I will consider it to check it soon, Any independent distro will have always a place in my mind as soon the opportunity knocking.

I'm not going to abandon Linux completely, but to I've lost a lot of trust in Debian since systemd, Debian once was my dearest OS.
Thanks to Devuan I still experience the feeling i once had. If things getting worse on the road, every other chances are open to me.

Regarding SalixOS, i know only by name, i'll make a visit to this distro aswell.

At the moment i'm having fun playing with BSD, I see that it have some limits compared to Linux. However, already i feel comfortable being on the BSD boats that i think is clean, honest and trustworthy regardless a few limits in some things.

Thanks mate, I'll consider your two suggestions that you put on the table.

BR!

Nili

Last edited by Nili (2019-12-09 14:11:29)

siva · 2019-12-09 14:52:58

HevyDevy wrote:

Im old school though, we will eventually get left behind and overtaken with tech that is shiny and "progressive"...

You'd think so, but then you've got people like me majoring in CSE.

freemedia2018 · 2019-12-09 22:37:14

im predicting proposal f. its the most cynical choice, its bound to win.

this is like american idol-- a pageant where we finally learn what they already wanted as a result.

Last edited by freemedia2018 (2019-12-09 22:37:43)

ToxicExMachina · 2019-12-10 04:45:27

Camtaf wrote:

If I'm not mistaken, 'unix' started out at AT&T as part of their phone system, but was made available to others, for a price, which then became Unix in its various forms.
BSD was a free version of unix, maintained by Berkley University, who had improved it no end, & was giving it away freely, until law makers/upholders got involved, as the kernel & a few other files were still in copyright.
This is where the GNU software came from, all but the kernel & a couple of files, which had to be replaced over time, to make BSD totally free, to distribute, alter, & use, as long as the Berkley copyright files were distributed with each copy.
I believe you will also find that the internet is run on BSD.

1. BSD was extended version of UNIX maintained by University of California.

2. GNU GPL was made before BSD license. Ancestors of GPL were also made long before as licenses for specific projects.

3. GNU software is irrelevant to BSD even from historical position. It was developed as libre software and UNIX architecture was chosen not because of BSD. They say UNIX way and nobody says BSD way.

4. BSD is the OS of PlayStation 4 and Nintendo Switch. BSD is also sharing important part of source code with Windows and Mac OS X. At the same time BSD fans screams when someone trying use BSD licensed code to improve libre software like GNU/Linux. That's a nice contribution to freedom, right? As for BSD as an internet server - it has insignificant share and most of it is the OS for small webservers located in CIS countries. So no, internet isn't running on BSD.

ToxicExMachina · 2019-12-10 05:34:37

freemedia2018 wrote:

ToxicExMachina wrote:
The better option is to fork Linux and reorganize it into community maintainable project. Now it's optimized for corporate invasion.
we are on the same page there, not only do i think a fork of linux is the better option, its the more likely one (better hardware support) but i still question how the original bsd was "proprietary software."
because of the license? as the software was not copyrightable, the only ways to make the software "proprietary" was to deny public access to source code (this wasnt done, afaik) and to try to use ndas or trade agreements (this wasnt done, afaik) since once someone had access they could already do what they wanted with it.
there was no reason to put the code under a license that said you could do what you could already do without one. bsd didnt exist until 74, and in 1972 gottschalk v. benson had made it extremely difficult to patent software, so there wasnt really that issue to contend with.

1. Initial parts of GNU GPL with copyleft principle were introduced at 1985 as GNU projects licenses. First version of GNU GPL was made at 24 feb. 1988. First version of BSD license was made later.

2. Software was copyrightable when BSD existed, and it was developed many years before the initial version of BSD license.

The main idea is: BSD is developed not for freedom. If someone want libre OS and considering BSD as an option - it's better to go to M$ Windows without intermediate steps.

Last edited by ToxicExMachina (2019-12-10 05:35:16)

freemedia2018 · 2019-12-10 05:36:35

ToxicExMachina wrote:

it's better to go to M$ Windows

ok, bsd isnt that bad!

ToxicExMachina wrote:

The main idea is: BSD is developed not for freedom.

fair enough, i can tell i better give you that one.

Last edited by freemedia2018 (2019-12-10 05:38:45)

yeti · 2019-12-10 05:36:45

MTTFA!
(Make This Thread Fun Again!)

https://web.archive.org/web/20161227121 … sdcon2006/
https://web.archive.org/web/20130929015 … sdcon2008/

ToxicExMachina · 2019-12-10 06:12:23

yeti wrote:

MTTFA!
(Make This Thread Fun Again!)
https://web.archive.org/web/20161227121 … sdcon2006/
https://web.archive.org/web/20130929015 … sdcon2008/

I am here not to begin a new flame war. I just explain why escaping from GNU/Linux instead of fighting to reclaim it back is a bad idea, and why escaping to BSD is really terrible idea in particular.

Last edited by ToxicExMachina (2019-12-10 06:12:52)

golinux · 2019-12-10 06:41:37

Blah, blah, blah . . . all this talk is not going to save GNU-Linux. Only DOING can accomplish that.

freemedia2018 · 2019-12-10 07:26:10

golinux wrote:

all this talk is not going to save GNU-Linux. Only DOING can accomplish that.

we do need a plan of some kind though.

if you want to see what putting an operating system without a plan is like, ask lennart. hes the king of just doing, and it shows. im aware that people spend too many years planning. we dont need years of planning, we need a week or two-- and a good idea.

Camtaf · 2019-12-10 11:42:45

BSD stands for Berkley Software Distribution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_ … stribution

HevyDevy · 2019-12-10 13:49:23

siva wrote:

HevyDevy wrote:
Im old school though, we will eventually get left behind and overtaken with tech that is shiny and "progressive"...
You'd think so, but then you've got people like me majoring in CSE.

Well if we are not in a minority now we will be is what i should have said. I hope not and your post is positive thinking, all the best with your major, hope you succeed.

pcalvert · 2019-12-12 06:07:36

yeti wrote:

Voidlinux looks nice. Unluckily only a rolling release. If enough migrants from De??an gather around it, making a spinoff in a stable+security flavor could be a plan-b too.

This looks quite interesting:

https://www.hyperbola.info/
https://wiki.hyperbola.info/doku.php?id=:en:start
https://distrowatch.com/table.php?distr … =hyperbola

I learned about it yesterday.

Phil

yeti · 2019-12-12 08:41:13

If I can save some old hardware from being trash by using some blobs that upset the FSF, I will happily do it. I prefer environmental decisions over RMS's happiness there. So extreme anti-blob distributions cannot be my way.

Last edited by yeti (2019-12-12 08:42:54)

Head_on_a_Stick · 2019-12-28 12:21:21

https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2 … 00212.html

aut0exec · 2019-12-28 12:28:46

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2 … 00212.html

That tallying system made the head hurt...

Didn't go as badly as thought but not as promising either. :-/

What's next?

The officially official Devuan Forum!

#51 2019-12-09 05:03:37

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#52 2019-12-09 05:10:20

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#53 2019-12-09 05:12:20

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#54 2019-12-09 05:19:51

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#55 2019-12-09 05:25:31

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#56 2019-12-09 06:28:23

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#57 2019-12-09 10:37:53

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#58 2019-12-09 10:40:53

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#59 2019-12-09 12:30:16

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#60 2019-12-09 14:09:15

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#61 2019-12-09 14:52:58

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#62 2019-12-09 22:37:14

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#63 2019-12-10 04:45:27

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#64 2019-12-10 05:34:37

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#65 2019-12-10 05:36:35

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#66 2019-12-10 05:36:45

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#67 2019-12-10 06:12:23

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#68 2019-12-10 06:41:37

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#69 2019-12-10 07:26:10

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#70 2019-12-10 11:42:45

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#71 2019-12-10 13:49:23

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#72 2019-12-12 06:07:36

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#73 2019-12-12 08:41:13

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#74 2019-12-28 12:21:21

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

#75 2019-12-28 12:28:46

Re: Debian considering going systemd init only

Board footer