w that.
Cheers.
[1] https://plus.google.com/108736516888538655285/posts/BTG39o6YoGS
[2] http://code.google.com/p/support/wiki/DVCSAnalysis
--
Felipe Contreras
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 3:51 AM, Jason Ryan wrote:
> On 15/08/12 at 03:35am, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> I just became aware that Arch Linux plans to switch to systemd, and
>> this worries me for several reasons.
>>
>> snip
>
> I am running it on both my home ma
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 4:40 AM, Jason Ryan wrote:
> On 15/08/12 at 04:01am, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 3:51 AM, Jason Ryan wrote:
>> > On 15/08/12 at 03:35am, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>>
>> >> I just became aware that Arch Linux plans
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:17 AM, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto
wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:35 PM, Felipe Contreras
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm sure in due time systemd will be ready, and will have nice
>> advantages, but I doubt that's the case right now.
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 6:33 AM, Leon Feng wrote:
> 2012/8/15 Felipe Contreras :
>> Hi,
>>
>> Finally, it's much harder to debug. If you have a problem you will not
>> be able to open a script and figure out what is happening, and perhaps
>> modify it, and
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 7:35 AM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> Felipe,
>
> On Aug 15, 2012 3:35 AM, "Felipe Contreras"
> wrote:
>> I tried systemd a while ago in a brand new machine with Arch Linux and
>> the boot was *much slower*. After some exchanges with Lennart
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Felipe Contreras
> wrote:
>> I don't have that machine available at the moment, but I don't see how
>> such an issue could have been fixed given the lack of interest fro
nBSDs init meets 1-3
> better
I agree in general, but systemd doesn't meet #4; we are supposed to
believe that's the case, but does it really?
--
Felipe Contreras
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Gaetan Bisson wrote:
> [2012-08-15 12:27:33 +0200] Felipe Contreras:
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Kevin Chadwick
>> wrote:
>> > 4./ be as fast as possible
>> >
>> > systemd meets 4.
>>
>> I agree in
es, and are simple themselves
>> 3./ Be easy to follow, fix and lockdown, best fit being interpreted
>> languages.
>
> So, init should be a small binary in an interpreted language? Am I the
> only one who notices you are contradicting yourself.
No. The "services" (in systemd lingo) should be in an interpreted
language: e.g. shell.
--
Felipe Contreras
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 12:09 PM, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 2:39 AM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Felipe Contreras
>> wrote:
>>>>> Well, I see absolutely no evidence of such an analysis, so consider me
>&g
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> Am 15.08.2012 13:34, schrieb Felipe Contreras:
>>>> 1./ Be a small simple binary
>>>
>>> The systemd main binary is not very large (larger than sysvinit's
>>> /sbin/init, but not by muc
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Leon Feng wrote:
> 2012/8/15 Felipe Contreras :
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Felipe Contreras
>>> wrote:
>>>> I don't have that machine available at
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Gaetan Bisson wrote:
> [2012-08-15 13:31:10 +0200] Felipe Contreras:
>> If you are making the claim that systemd is
>> faster, you should have clear undeniable evidence at hand, where is
>> it?
>
> Everywhere:
>
> http
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Gaetan Bisson wrote:
> [2012-08-15 14:01:16 +0200] Felipe Contreras:
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Thomas Bächler wrote:
>> > Am 15.08.2012 13:34, schrieb Felipe Contreras:
>> >> No. The "services" (in sy
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Rémy Oudompheng
wrote:
> On 2012/8/15 Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Thomas Bächler wrote:
>>> Am 15.08.2012 13:34, schrieb Felipe Contreras:
>>>>>> 1./ Be a small simple binary
>>>>&
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> Am 15.08.2012 14:01, schrieb Felipe Contreras:
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Thomas Bächler wrote:
>>> Am 15.08.2012 13:34, schrieb Felipe Contreras:
>>>>>> 1./ Be a small simple binary
>>>
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Brandon Watkins wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Felipe Contreras <
> felipe.contre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Rémy Oudompheng
>> wrote:
>> > On 2012/8/15 Felipe Contreras wrote:
&
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 6:25 PM, Rashif Ray Rahman wrote:
> On 15 August 2012 21:31, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> I just subscribed to this list, and 80% of the traffic I'm seeing is
>> problems with systemd. That should tell you something; systemd has
>> problems.
>
ral, when only a fraction of users are testing systemd, so
chances are this going to happen when most are forced/guided to
switch.
Cheers.
--
Felipe Contreras
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Leonid Isaev wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 12:27:33 +0200
> Felipe Contreras wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Kevin Chadwick
>> wrote:
>> >> I'd love to see the overall advantages and disadvantages of each of
>
encies as commands, that doesn't make any
> difference.
>
> I am not pro-systemd at all, I'm even rather for alternatives. Please
> don't make the pro-alternative arguments ridiculous.
You don't *need* cgroups or dbus if you don't use them in Arch Linux.
--
Felipe Contreras
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:05 PM, Gaetan Bisson wrote:
> [2012-08-15 15:03:21 +0200] Felipe Contreras:
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Gaetan Bisson wrote:
>> > Everywhere:
>> >
>> > https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=systemd+boot+time
>&g
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto
wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 3:39 AM, Felipe Contreras
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:17 AM, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:35 PM, Felipe Contreras
>>> w
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> On Aug 15, 2012 1:56 PM, "Felipe Contreras"
> wrote:
>> The biggest thing any program can do is not the technical details
>> of the program itself; it’s how useful the program is to users.
>> So any
and the community too.
Do what the Linux kernel does: ignore the mails. Most mail clients
have an option to mute a thread.
--
Felipe Contreras
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> Am 16.08.2012 14:14, schrieb Felipe Contreras:
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 10:02 PM, fredbezies wrote:
>>> I'm an old archlinux user (first installation back in december 2008),
>>> and for a long time, I was
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 8:18 PM, Rashif Ray Rahman wrote:
> On 16 August 2012 01:21, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> So, if you *already* know that there are problems, why not wait?
>> What's wrong with waiting another year, and see if you don't see so
>> many problems
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 7:58 PM, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto
wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Felipe Contreras
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 3:39 AM, Felipe Contreras
>>> wrot
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> Am 16.08.2012 15:08, schrieb Felipe Contreras:
>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Thomas Bächler wrote:
>>> Am 16.08.2012 14:14, schrieb Felipe Contreras:
>>>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 10:02 PM, fredb
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Alexandre Ferrando wrote:
> On 16 August 2012 15:16, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> My problem with CONFIG_HZ exists
>> independently of whether you experience the problem yourself or not.
>
> I guess you've reported it to kernel devs, righ
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Vytautas Stankevičius
wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Felipe Contreras
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Thomas Bächler wrote:
>>> I want to squash the noise that has turned this list from a helpful and
>>&
he
> fact that some other major distros have already made the switch some time
> ago).
It is best to do it sooner? Why? In order to maximize the breakage?
No. It is best to do it later; to minimize the problems.
Cheers.
--
Felipe Contreras
of authoritarianism all day long, but it's still
authoritarianism.
> all i see here recently are rants on rants which really should be taken else
> where.
Ignore them. Again, that's what people do on LKML, and guess what: it works.
--
Felipe Contreras
well (e.g. LKML).
--
Felipe Contreras
need for banning; just
ignore the post you think are spam, or trolling, or boring, or
whatever.
--
Felipe Contreras
t just make
an unsupported statement, but actually show an argument: the more
mature a piece of software is, the less likely it is you are going to
hit a bug.
Can you do the same? Not just say "X is true", but "X is true because
Y", if you don't, then there's no value in your statements.
--
Felipe Contreras
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto
wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Felipe Contreras
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Brandon Watkins wrote:
>>
>>> A big switch like this will have problems regardless of when you do it. Its
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 4:08 PM, John K Pate wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 15:16:31 +0200
> Felipe Contreras wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 7:58 PM, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto
>> wrote:
>> > This is so stupid that it's not even funny. You said that the proble
>> It was especially hurtful for me. QQ
>>
>> I've done my very best to stay focused on the actual software
>> and the argumentation of their merits.
>>
>>
> Could those receiving these emails please speak out? I haven't, for one.
> Not that much can be done about it..
I have received about 30 of them, all from 74.63.112.146.
--
Felipe Contreras
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Ionut Biru wrote:
> with or without this poll, we are continuing with our plan.
That's exactly what you should do, if your objective is to loose
users; ignore them.
Cheers.
--
Felipe Contreras
t before.
--
Felipe Contreras
ll have
> little trouble adjusting, and 98% will at that time agree it was
> clearly the right choice.
Maybe, maybe not, but is it the right choice *now*? That's the question.
> initiatives like this are not removing choice
Yes they are. I don't want to use systemd, what will be my choice?
--
Felipe Contreras
le a *choice*.
--
Felipe Contreras
forcing you to move to systemd *now* is there? You
could just as easily move one year later, and in fact, it would be
easier.
--
Felipe Contreras
ll). So, a sensible person would wait until a sensible time to make
the big switch (which is clearly not now).
--
Felipe Contreras
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 6:22 AM, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto
wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Felipe Contreras
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 4:08 PM, John K Pate wrote:
>>> On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 15:16:31 +0200
>>> Felipe Contreras wrote:
>>>
>
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:28 AM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Felipe Contreras
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Patrick Murphy wrote:
>>> Could you give me a brief explanation as to why init scripts are better?
>>> I'm new
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
> On 22.08.2012 02:10, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Patrick Murphy
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Could you give me a brief explanation as to why init scripts are better?
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:30 AM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 7:56 AM, Felipe Contreras
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 11:22 PM, Myra Nelson wrote:
>>> Even with udev moving into systemd, an individual on the systemd mailing
>>> list
>&g
p. But even if I didn't happen to have any
problems, that doesn't meant the rest of the people won't.
But I already explained that to you, I have given up on you, I'm
simply stating it again for the record.
--
Felipe Contreras
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 6:22 AM, Leon Feng wrote:
> 2012/8/22 Felipe Contreras :
>> Maybe, maybe not, but is it the right choice *now*? That's the question.
>
> Some upstream package are start to require systemd support. Udev,
> Polkit is just an example.
And I say thi
does most of the job,
the rest is loading the right modules at boot time, which can be done
with a simple script. There's also mdev from busybox, but it's too
simple, I don't really understand what is the point of it.
But there's certainly people that don't use udev at
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
> On 22.08.2012 02:48, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 22.08.2012 02:10, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>>>>
>
rees of
certainty in the results), and something being "stable enough to be
used" (there's different degrees of certainty).
Apparently there's no choice of words that can transmit what I am
actually trying to say to you.
Cheers.
--
Felipe Contreras
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 11:22 PM, Sebastian Günther wrote:
> * Felipe Contreras (felipe.contre...@gmail.com) [22.08.12 02:22]:
>> Funny that you say "around the same time", when it's clearly less than
>> 6 seconds, so it's 15% slower, but that's the secon
ot being unusable, and I even went further describing exactly that:
you can be on the bleeding edge and still *try* to not break things.
Since you deliberately didn't quote the rest of the paragraph, the
original meaning might not be clear, but obviously it's not within the
context.
The point was that all distributions should aim to at least be
bootable and should be careful with things that might break the boot.
What's wrong with this point? What's FUD about it?
You should focus on my arguments, not on my rhetoric.
Cheers.
--
Felipe Contreras
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 2:47 AM, Norbert Zeh wrote:
> Felipe Contreras [2012.08.23 2214 +0200]:
>> Notice that I said "probably". Again, I don't *need* to provide any
>> evidence because I'm not making the claim that systemd has problems,
>> or th
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:39 PM, Stephen E. Baker
wrote:
> On 23/08/2012 4:14 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> [snip]
>
>> Is systemd ready? Where is the evidence?
>
>
> https://www.archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics shows that about 14% of
> arch users who are
one for that matter), but if a bum says
there was a crime, cops could still investigate to make sure that's
the case.
> but demanding the devs comply with his wishes.
I am not demanding anything.
Since your whole mail is nothing but a bunch of ad hominem attacks,
I'll simply stop replying to you.
Cheers.
--
Felipe Contreras
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 4:31 AM, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia
wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 09:23:33PM +0200, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> > So it's only needs twice the time with only on third of the ticks? Well
>> > that is awesome... Yeah to s
tch much?
Cheers.
[1] http://felipec.wordpress.com/2012/09/26/dissent/
[2] http://lmgtfy.com/?q=mute+thread
--
Felipe Contreras
62 matches
Mail list logo
