Re: systemd-free alternatives are not off topic.
On 11/24/2014 10:05 AM, Scott Ferguson wrote:
> On 25/11/14 00:25, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>> On 11/24/2014 2:56 AM, Scott Ferguson wrote: <snip>
>>>> Yes, and while the Linux community continues, Debian will lose a
>>>> lot of dedicated users due to this decision. Possibly another
>>>> fork, or possibly another distro. But Debian will lose users.
>>>
>>> 1. At best that's pure speculation. With all due respect to Gypsy
>>> Rose Lee (who is really just a naughty boy), some of us "engineer
>>> types" place little stock in soothsaying.
>>>
>>
>> It is more than speculation. Read the posts here - some people
>> (including me) are already looking for alternatives. And so are many
>> companies I know of who have looked at jessie.
>
> 1. Like most things, that's relative. In this instance to the number of
> readers and "users":-
> https://lwn.net/Articles/620441/
> and, see my comments further down about "churn" (if I was overly tired
> and emotional I might write "they're your ball, you know where your home
> is?", "empty promises", and, "what's second prize?". But I'm not 'that'
> tired and emotional).
>
> 2. Fore-telling the future, especially when the basis for future
> extrapolation is *not* based on *any* (supplied and confirm-able) facts
> - is assumption (not presumption - which generally, pre-supposes 'some'
> evidence, of which you provide none (which doesn't preclude the
> possibility you will at a later stage).
> "Presumption" is distinct from "assumptions". (not to imply you are
> cognitively impaired, just in awareness that this is not a 1:1
> communication)
>
It is not an assumption nor a presumption or prediction. Several people
here (including me) have already indicated they are abandoning Debian
for another distro or BSD. So have most of my customers who are
currently using Debian. It is a fact.
> 3. "companies" that you 'know '"have looked at Jessie" (which is not yet
> a Stable release) is like "secret attorneys" - not demonstrable facts
> and of dubious relevance. An unintentional oversight on your part I
> 'suspect'.
> I may be alone in the desire to not start jumping at shadows (or hanging
> monkeys in sailor suits) - that 'may' (based on historical precedence)
> only lead to burning witches and people that don't look like the tribal
> patriarch.
>
By contract, I am not allowed to specify which of my customers are
running what. If you've ever been a consultant, you should be aware of
non-disclosure agreements; they are a standard part of almost every
consulting contract I've ever signed.
But that does not mean they are not jumping ship.
>>
>>> 2. It's false logic to conclude *only* losses from change (and
>>> duplicitous to deny that systemd is your only choice) - it
>>> overlooks the possibility that the additional *choice* of systemd
>>> will attract more users (and more instances - you do know that
>>> many "administrators" manage large numbers of instances, right?).
>>> There is no evidence to show that other distros and projects that
>>> adopted systemd as the *only* choice lost users - quite the
>>> reverse.
>>>
>>
>> These are the ones who are abandoning Debian.
>
> Citation? "These" is a, um, little vague.
>
As I said - contracts forbid me from giving specifics. But I'm sure
you'll use that to say they don't exist. They do, however.
>> Some of them came to Debian because it was one of the last holdouts.
>
> Is that a reference to a term used in a television show about the
> fictitious "Wild West"? I can only apologise of my ignorance of "popular
> culture" (long story - I haven't watched "television" in several decades
> - did I miss something important?).
>
No, it has nothing to do with TV.
> Never-the-less I suspect what you refer[*1] to is what is called
> "churn". Tyre-kickers, testers, those that don't want to/don't have the
> time/capacity to learn sufficient skills, those that lack the
> motivation/capacity to decide for them selves and "go with the flow" (of
> the noisiest) - as some might say - like dead fish. None of which would
> be clients of your "business" - though admittedly I'm guessing at your
> business model and mean no undue disrespect to you as a Veteran Unix
> Administrator. (it's late, I'm tired, please forgive any clumsy wording
> and a total lack of editorial review, be assured I've endeavoured to
> extend the same courtesy).
>
It is not churn. Companies don't change distros on a whim; it is very
expensive to install and test new software. If they have to train
people on that new software, the cost increases. Therefore, every
software installation is carefully examined before even attempting to
install it.
For instance - in the case of upgrading a Debian package, it means
looking at the documentation with that package and, in the case of
release changes to the base product, the documentation to those changes.
It them means installing on a test system and running a long series of
tests. And when the system is being upgraded, every package being
upgraded has to be examined. Then the new code is installed on test
servers and checked for interoperability with existing code.
A good example in point. Several years ago, one of my clients installed
an upgrade which included a new version of MySQL Server. Unfortunately,
MySQL had closed a hole in their stored procedures which caused several
critical stored procs to fail. These problems were found because the
sysadmins did their job; as a result the final upgrade went smoothly.
Had they just blindly upgraded MySQL, the resulting outage would have
been a huge financial hit to the company.
>> But they see the way Debian is going also, and don't like it.
>
> Objection - remains supposition *until* you supply evidence. I don't
> doubt you don't "like it" (shades of Fffacefriend and primary
> school??)But... there are many things I don't like, *I*'ll spare you,
> and other readers further expansion on them.
>
I was correct. You're already asking for names - which I already
indicated I cannot supply. So you just dismiss my statements.
Just because I can't name names does not mean they don't exist.
>> They'll probably end up on BSD.
>
> Not necessarily a bad thing. BSD (a generic for a diversity of
> distributions, can use love - providing that those disenfranchised
> refugees that you refer to:-
> ;exist
> ;provide love
>
And none of those distros use systemd - which for them is a good thing.
>>
>>>>
>>>> Sure, people who only run software in .deb packages won't be hit
>>>> as hard.
>>>
>>> At all. And then only if *they* don't elect to stay with sysv.
>>>
>>> But that is definitely not the entire Debian user base.
>>>
>>
>> I never said it was the entire Debian user base.
>
> Nor did I say you did. Please don't put words in my mouth.
>
You intimated at it.
>> But even staying with sysv is only a temporary situation.
>
> In your "prediction" of *future* events. Which is dependant on "Debian"
> ceasing to do what Debian has done for more than two decades - overcome
> difficulties and adapt to change (an instructive guide to coping, and
> profiting from change, don't you think?)
>
They see the way the TC and GRs have gone, and don't like it. They are
making the decision to move now while they have plenty of time, instead
of later when they are forced to do so under limited time constraints.
>> They see the handwriting on the wall
>
> Daniel[*2] or Omar Khayyám? [confused, but still keen to learn]
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_writing_on_the_wall
>> - whether you agree with it or not.
>
> For the record - 'I' don't. On the basis of I've seen no evidence, in
> spite of extensive research and carefully open-minded view, of any
> factual support for the proof of soothsaying or prophecy (I was
> disappointed to discover that Uri Geller was a fraud, but I digress). In
> light of "assume the best intentions" I invite you to provide evidence
> to the contrary. Please.
>
The TC and GR votes, to start with. And like it or not, systemd is
taking over the Linux world; more and more products are going to depend
on it.
Top IT guys in companies NEED to look ahead and predict what they think
is going to happen. Often times their company's survival depends on the
computer systems working correctly. So they do their best to
investigate and make their best prediction of what will happen, often
times 2-3 years (and often even longer term) in the future because
change doesn't happen overnight. Switching to a new OS can easily take
6-9 months, from time if initial investigation to running in production.
What they see about systemd concerns them greatly, and the TC and GR
actions concern them greatly about the future of Debian.
Now I will admit they may be wrong. But if they are right about
systemd, they can't afford to stay.
>>
>>> Those that deploy customisations in the "Debian Way" should file
>>> bug reports if those customisations are not supported *if* they
>>> change init systems. Upgrades have *always* supported
>>> customisations done the "Debian Way" - and I have every confidence
>>> they will continue to do so
>>>
>>
>> And exactly what is the "Debian way" to add custom (NOT customized
>> pre-packaged) software to the system?
>
> Please, 'try' and extend the same level of consideration and respect
> that others extend to you. I don't consider you a moron, or a "Linux
> newbie" (and that's not a politically correct statement, it's based on
> previous experience, appreciation of your past contributions to Debian
> User, and various PHP forums). In light of which I endeavour not to
> insult your intelligence (or threaten your pride) - the general
> consensus is rather than hijack a thread:-
> ; search debian.org (read the documentation, look at the wiki)
> ; search Debian User
> ; read the fine documentation
> ; when the above fails, after consulting the Debian Wiki and "how to ask
> smart questions" guide, read the posting rules for this list, and post a
> suitably Subject titled question instead of hijacking threads or
> employing the Gish Gallop (or follow your own "tough love" advice?)
>
> I have no doubt you are capable of the above, though I recognise your
> "situation" is not mine and may involve impediments I've failed to
> adequately compensate for. My sincere apologies if that marginalises
> your complaints (I can be a bit thick - at times, despite "best
> intentions"). Even if I'm the only person who'd miss your positive
> contributions to this list - I still be saddened by your departure.
>
>
I am not trying to insult people's intelligence. It was a rhetorical
question.
Jerry
Reply to: