> It must be perfectly doable to have a linux desktop without systemd
and policykit, and also without dbus. I am sorry for the guy who gently
proposes to maintain dbus on devuan, but I would like if its installation
was optionnal, because I would like to see how it can work without it.
Dbus maintainer here. I too would prefer that dbus is optional. Part of
the reason I stepped up to maintain it is to try and figure out how to make
doing so easier. I've gotten a laptop working without it before (fbpanel +
openbox + fdpowermon + xfm + urxvt + chromium + juffEd + ... ), so I'll bet
I can come up with a virtual package for Devuan that pulls in the right
dependencies.
> But, for a desktop, udev, eudev, or vdev is mandatory.
Is it? A lot of applications need libudev, but if I can get libudev-compat
to generate the requisite information from sysfs and a static dev, I'll
spring for that instead of having it depend on a device manager. Static
dev should remain an option for as long as it is feasible, IMHO.
-Jude
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 5:25 AM, Didier Kryn <kryn@???> wrote:
> Agreed, Martijn. I know others doing like you. This makes full sense.
>
> But there are also people, like me, who are fans of DIY, and have fun
> assembling things to obtain a nice working Linux desktop (I also install
> and manage servers). It takes some time, but it is (was?) perfectly doable.
> I don't think people like me are the target of Gnome, but I thought we were
> the target of Debian.
>
> It must be perfectly doable to have a linux desktop without systemd
> and policykit, and also without dbus. I am sorry for the guy who gently
> proposes to maintain dbus on devuan, but I would like if its installation
> was optionnal, because I would like to see how it can work without it. But,
> for a desktop, udev, eudev, or vdev is mandatory.
>
> I dislike dbus because I find it too complicated and do-it-all,
> although I understand the motivation for it. Also, as far as I remember, it
> is too much C++-minded. I have been programming in C from the beginning of
> the 80's and loved it, but I think C++ is wrong by design (personal
> thought), although I have no choice but to use programs written in that
> language, as well as Perl, Python and Ruby, which I have no opinion about.
>
> Same kind of dislike towards network-manager. This is the first
> package I use to remove after installing Debian. The reason: I don't know
> really what it does and how, but it goes in the middle of my way. I am well
> off with ifplugd, wpa_supplicant and a roaming configuration of wlan0.
>
> After its decision to force systemd in, Debian should rename itself
> Debian-Gnome-Linux, and I hope Devuan will truely be Devuan-Gnu-Linux.
> There's no harm in having several OS based on the same kernel. After all,
> there's already Busybox-Linux, this is a fact; Busybox's not Gnu; and
> similar projects.
>
> Didier
>
> Le 12/02/2015 06:33, Martijn Dekkers a écrit :
>
>>
>> About 5 to 6 years ago, I came to a point where I found that I was
>> spending more time making things work then actually using them, and a
>> while later, reluctantly, I switched my main desktop environment to
>> Windows. I manage a good number of servers, with the vast majority of
>> them running Linux, but desktops? Windows all the way. Gnome developed
>> exactly along the path I suspected it would which is why I avoided it
>> - Miguel de Icaza being an early incarnation of Lennart. (although I
>> am very happy with the Midnight Commander...), and although KDE is a
>> lot more agreeable to my tastes, there is simply too much tweaking and
>> day to day little hassles - I have a job to do, and my PC is the tool
>> I need to do this job - it needs to Just Work(tm)
>>
>> Whilst I am still utterly amazed with how awesome Linux servers are, I
>> don't think we will ever get there with desktops.
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dng mailing list
> Dng@???
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
>
::
Re: [Dng] John Goerzen asks, "Has m…
