Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 19th May 2011 18:59 UTC, submitted by fran
Gnome Something's - once again - brewing within the GNOME project. While a mere suggestion for now, and by no means any form of official policy, influential voices within the GNOME project are arguing that GNOME should become a full-fledged Linux-based operating system, and that the desktop environment should drop support for other operating systems such as Solaris and the BSDs. I have a feeling this isn't going to go down well with many of our readers.
Thread beginning with comment 474106
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Sad but inevitable
by toast88 on Sat 21st May 2011 10:41 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Sad but inevitable"
toast88
Member since:
2009-09-23

Heh... Do you really expect a decently designed OS to adopt a gross hack like systemd just to run GNOME?


You clearly have no idea what systemd is all about. It's not just a neat replacement for init like upstart but a serious attempt to massively parallelize daemon startup, introduce a nanny for the daemons, reduce the clutter from all the bash scripts in /etc/init.d and much more.

systemd is heavily inspired by Apple's launchd which has replaced everything from rc.d to cron.d in MacOS since 10.4.

Bringing something like launchd to Linux is just awesome and helps to dramatically reduce boot times, increase reliability of daemons and reduce the effort to maintaining init.

systemd is so much better and cleaner than sysvinit and upstart and I am already using it on some of my Debian systems.

With FreeBSD still being stuck to sysinstall as their installers or CVS as their primary revision control system, I am not surprised that they are so fiercely fighting any progress.

I don't have any problems with the BSD people. But people from Linux community have their right to choose a certain direction development for their software and BSD people shouldn't be bitching about that, sorry.

Adrian

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Sad but inevitable
by vermaden on Sat 21st May 2011 10:50 in reply to "RE[4]: Sad but inevitable"
vermaden Member since:
2006-11-18

With FreeBSD still being stuck to sysinstall as their installers


You probably havent heard about sysinstall replacement called bsdinstall, here have a read:
http://wiki.freebsd.org/BSDInstall

CVS as their primary revision control system, I am not surprised that they are so fiercely fighting any progress.

FreeBSD uses SVN for development since 2008.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Sad but inevitable
by toast88 on Sat 21st May 2011 11:10 in reply to "RE[5]: Sad but inevitable"
toast88 Member since:
2009-09-23

"With FreeBSD still being stuck to sysinstall as their installers


You probably havent heard about sysinstall replacement called bsdinstall, here have a read:
http://wiki.freebsd.org/BSDInstall
"

No, I haven't. But from the link you provided it seems that bsdinstall is just supposed to be an intermediate solution. It's surely an improvement, but does it compare with the modern installers like debian-installer or anaconda provided on Linux?

Is it already used by default when I download and install a current stable release of FreeBSD? We're not talking about stuff which is still in the making but actually being used ;) .

"CVS as their primary revision control system, I am not surprised that they are so fiercely fighting any progress.

FreeBSD uses SVN for development since 2008.
"

Which isn't really an improvement over CVS for a large scale project like FreeBSD. I think most developers agree, that for really large projects which have many branches in the sources and lots of developers, a distributed RCS like git is a much better choice.

Adrian

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Sad but inevitable
by pfgbsd on Sat 21st May 2011 18:02 in reply to "RE[4]: Sad but inevitable"
pfgbsd Member since:
2011-03-12



You clearly have no idea what systemd is all about. It's not just a neat replacement for init like upstart but a serious attempt to massively parallelize daemon startup, introduce a nanny for the daemons, reduce the clutter from all the bash scripts in /etc/init.d and much more.


Fortunately MacOS X is a BSD camp and wont follow suit but I wish you luck pushing such brilliant ideas into Windows then.

systemd is heavily inspired by Apple's launchd which has replaced everything from rc.d to cron.d in MacOS since 10.4.


Which was ported to FreeBSD and lives happily in the ports tree, should anyone really need it.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: Sad but inevitable
by toast88 on Sat 21st May 2011 22:16 in reply to "RE[5]: Sad but inevitable"
toast88 Member since:
2009-09-23

"systemd is heavily inspired by Apple's launchd which has replaced everything from rc.d to cron.d in MacOS since 10.4.


Which was ported to FreeBSD and lives happily in the ports tree, should anyone really need it.
"

Nice, I didn't know that!

So, there should be a chance to write some "glue code" which would make GNOME use launchd on *BSD instead of systemd, shouldn't there?

Didn't someone already mention in this thread that Poettering himself said that he would rather see people write a BSD-specific version of systemd instead of putting too much bloat into the systemd sources by porting it to non-Linux platforms?

With that in mind, I think the situation with GNOME depending on systemd is probably far less problematic than many would think =).

Actually, I like FreeBSD for adopting a lot of nice things from the enterprise world like zfs and launchd. BSD is obviously better off in this regard when they don't have to reinvent the wheel (btrfs, systemd) but can simply use software which is already around.

Adrian

Edited 2011-05-21 22:18 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1