I'm tired of sighing each cycle.
Still no systemd or delta-debs...
Archived thread 1872559 from Ubuntu +1 (Precise Pangolin)(Closed). Markdown source: Ubuntu_+1_(Precise_Pangolin)(Closed)/thread_1872559_Still_no_systemd_or_delta-debs....md
Starks said: I'm tired of sighing each cycle.
Why would you expect such changes to be introduced with an LTS version?
http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/13/
Marked as "in development." I'd call it progress, at least.
Including systemd in any release was discussed at the start of Oneiric development, it was decided then to wait until after 12.04 was released, before any thing would be done. I personally can't see it being included in a default install considering how much Canonical has invested in upstart, but it will be optional. just like btrfs support.
Today at UDS:
15:00 Systemd/Packagekit Integration in Antigua 3.
is there another delta deb meeting? I sure hope it finally lands this cycle. its working so great in debian.
systemd will obviously not be in 12.04 its far too new for such a large archive but delta debs are isolated from the regular channels and its working well since ages.
MacUntu said: Today at UDS:
15:00 Systemd/Packagekit Integration in Antigua 3.
I don't think that has anything to do with actually switching to systemd or PackageKit. It is about implementing their dbus interfaces so that Ubuntu won't have to patch GNOME software to use some other interface. In the case of systemd, the interfaces are implemented by separate helper daemons which could be shipped by Ubuntu without using the rest of systemd.
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-p-systemd-packagekit
Right, should have read the blueprint. :)
cariboo907 said: Including systemd in any release was discussed at the start of Oneiric development, it was decided then to wait until after 12.04 was released, before any thing would be done. I personally can't see it being included in a default install considering how much Canonical has invested in upstart, but it will be optional. just like btrfs support.
btrfs will be default at some point once it's stable, but not sure yet about systemd... but it would be a good thing that distros had this in common instead of trying to duplicate efforts yet again.
Isn't that what systemd is? a duplication of effort? We already have upstart instead of creating a second (or third, or fourth) init system why not work on improving what is already in place.
The only reason I can see behind this, is that upstart wasn't created by RedHat, and they seem to be the big push behind most of the changes we are seeing, even if they don't come out and say it.
cariboo907 said: Isn't that what systemd is? a duplication of effort? We already have upstart instead of creating a second (or third, or fourth) init system why not work on improving what is already in place.
The only reason I can see behind this, is that upstart wasn't created by RedHat, and they seem to be the big push behind most of the changes we are seeing, even if they don't come out and say it. Systemd and upstart are not similar. You are free to disagree with systemd's design, but it is not reasonable to suggest that its goals could have been met by working on upstart.
http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systemd https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Systemd . i take it people dont know what google is here
crdlb said: Systemd and upstart are not similar. You are free to disagree with systemd's design, but it is not reasonable to suggest that its goals could have been met by working on upstart.
I know they are different, but they accomplish the same thing. To the end user what difference will it make, will my system play a tune and a movie while it's booting? Will it boot 3 times faster? Forget the technical details. Tell what it will do for me. What difference if any will I see?
dext said: http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systemd https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Systemd . i take it people dont know what google is here
During Oneiric Alpha process, Firefox constantly reseted search engine to ask.com. We made an agreement to only use ask.com, from then on.
systemd has many more features, so the one doing catch up is upstart, so we are behind and still trying to duplicate efforts for only one distro.
and fedora had upstart and they contributed, but am sure they had good reasons for starting something that would be better in many ways from scratch.
not saying ubuntu needs to drop upstart in this or next cycle, but they need to start testing ubuntu with systemd, filling bugs early to upstream, etc..
in time upstart may become like an old xorg, while everyone else would had moved on to wayland.
but thank God canonical is not the one that will be trying to keep X alive at least..
cariboo907 said: I know they are different, but they accomplish the same thing. To the end user what difference will it make, will my system play a tune and a movie while it's booting? Will it boot 3 times faster? Forget the technical details. Tell what it will do for me. What difference if any will I see?
It *can* play a tune while booting :P http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2011-February/001252.html
BwackNinja said: It *can* play a tune while booting :P
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2011-February/001252.html
now that ubuntu will be on multiple types of devices some of those features will fit it better
It's been a day since I asked what benefits the end user will see from using systemd, the only answer I got was about startup and shutdown sounds.
Does anyone personally run systemd on any distribution, or is this one of things that looks cool, but nobody has actually tried it yet?
cariboo907 said: ... is this one of things that looks cool, but nobody has actually tried it yet?
I haven't tried it, but it primarily seems to have the technical advantage of cgroups. That was something added to the kernel after upstart was implemented, so it's not surprising that upstart wouldn't have that yet.
I haven't researched the current implementation status, if any, but I think cgroups is in upstart roadmap: http://www.mail-archive.com/upstart-devel@lists.ubuntu.com/msg01493.html
As far as I could see until now, systemd would make it easier for managing servers, but would make small difference to desktop use?
And there's a lot of change to be done to Ubuntu to adopt it. Some files are standardized to different locations than those adopted by Ubuntu/Debian, which will break a lot of scripts and general shell code out there.
effenberg0x0 said: As far as I could see until now, systemd would make it easier for managing servers, but would make small difference to desktop use?
There seem to be conflicting opinions about it's usefulness on servers....
http://monolight.cc/2011/05/the-systemd-fallacy/
Later, Seeker
The only thing I care about is maturity, and systemd is still about five years away in that respect. With all the features it claims to have, I suspect they'll be mostly bug-free by then.
seeker5528 said: There seem to be conflicting opinions about it's usefulness on servers....
http://monolight.cc/2011/05/the-systemd-fallacy/
Later, Seeker That made some really interesting reading.
I haven't tried systemd yet, too busy. Going to just to see what the noise is about. Reading the 2 links made this more urgent. The noise level is incredible.
I am with gsmanners on the maturity issue. If this bugger is going to do what it claims it will do it is going to be a good ways down the road.