Hi Stephanie! =)

On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 13:44:42 +0000
Stephanie Daugherty <sdaugherty@???> wrote:



>
> I fear however that we're going to see packages with deeper and deeper
> entanglement with systemd, where it won't be a simple matter to patch
> the software to work correctly. Gnome already seems to be moving full
> speed ahead in this direction, and unfortunately, it's a matter of
> time before others follow suit.

It's already a done deal. KDE announced that they are going to
soft-depend on systemd. =P

I really so not see what the big deal about a shim is, and why we
even debating the idea.


It is just a compatibility wrapper, no more or less evil than any other.
BSD already does that for some software because Linux has basically
taken over. Yes, systemd is Linux specific and I prefer POSIX, but
there is no official spec in POSIX for init, so I can't fault anyone
for using systemd. Systemd is not particularly good for servers and so
I agree with Devuan that it needs to remain optional, but neither is it
a pressing problem that is going to end the world.

I prefer to stick with the engineering facts, and not hyperbole. There
are three and only three ways to end the "systemd/Linux only" problem.
One is to force the Linux community to stop using Linux only system
calls. That is *NOT* going to happen. The other is to provide a layer
to mitigate those calls. That is exactly what a shim does. The third is
to fork every software that depends on systemd or drop support for it
entirely. What Devuan does on that is up to them, but I would suggest
that a Devuan without software is less useful than one that uses a
shim. I do not think they are going to have the resources to maintain
an ever-increasing number of forks.


> I think collaboration with
> them on a common implementation that provides a workable, portable,
> and non-invasive comparability layer would be mutually beneficial,
> and needn't be exclusive of efforts to disentangle packages from the
> systemd beast altogether.

Personally, I agree with you.

I see the shim as the only reasonable option going forward at present,
unless things change within the community radically. It's the only one
that makes engineering sense. FreeBSD also thinks the same way, They
are presently working on a shim to mitigate the issue of systemd.

I know not everyone here agrees with me, especially Steve, and that's
perfectly okay. I have no problem with that at all. I just don't see
"System 5 pure" as realistic when planning ahead looking at a
maintenance standpoint when Debuan upstream is more and more likely to
stick with Systemd in designing their packaging.

If it is of any interest, the last time I tested Debian Sid a few days
ago, it had the option on the Grub menu to choose to boot via System
5 or Systemd.

Have a fabulous day!
T.J.