On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 03:54:11PM +1000, Andrew McGlashan wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256Hi, On 25/07/18 07:41, Matthew Crews wrote:In addition to this, be sure not to break Debian: https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian https://wiki.debian.org/DebianSoftware#Footnotes"Broken" .... many of us strongly believe that once the Debian project went down the route of systemd, they intrinsically broke Debian and trust with users; others seem to sincerely believe that systemd is all good or mostly good. So, "broken" can be subjective to say the least.
I'm not sure you understand how Debian works, then. Debian is a political animal as much as it is technical. There was a technical requirement for a better init system, so there was a political process to decide what that would be (I say political because, although there was a technical committee making the decision, opinions were sought from the user base, so there was the possibility of minds being swayed). When the decision to use systemd was achieved, Debian went down the road of preferring that as the init system. Breaking Debian, in this instance, means introducing applications from outside the ecosystem. Packages in Debian are, generally speaking, tested and reviewed to work with each other. Of course there will be incompatibilities, but perhaps a Breaks: header will fix that, or the maintainer will push an updated version. With applications from outside Debian, though, you don't have that guarantee. Often, packages from outside Debian can be quite naive - not working with dpkg-statoverride perhaps, or installing files and not removing them on uninstall, or perhaps just conflicting with files which ARE in Debian.
What you're talking about, though, isn't breaking Debian per se, but breaking Linux/Unix as an ethos. The UNIX ethos is many small tools, each doing one thing well. SysV init is a good example of that and systemd isn't. But then, one could say that the Linux kernel is not a good example of the UNIX ethos, either - it's big and complicated and we'd probably all be better off switching to a microkernel.
To me and others whom share my views, Debian is indeed broken like many other "modern day" Linux distros; one answer is Devuan [1], which I fully support. On the whole, I have been very saddened by the path that this project has taken and I'm hoping that one day it will "right" itself once again, but I'm not holding my breath as I think the damage to date (without considering what more badness is to come) has been too great, there are egos that are too large, and the complexity created is already far too significant, to reverse this terrible, terrible decision to "fix" something in such a damaging way. [1] https://devuan.org Kind Regards AndrewM -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF4EAREIAAYFAltYEHsACgkQqBZry7fv4vvl2AD+NeJxBjb7+S0uyB7a5oo3MyE0 0FNQ1D0jFvihoz9FhyYBAJOBP+6umtm6iOhZlt3yFI6BRhfefE9U8nJYXu2Gl03L =6TiA -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- For more information, please reread.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
