On 11.07.2017 15:02, Simon Hobson wrote:

> But it clear from reading comments on any article mentioning
> systemd that a great many people really have no idea why
> they should care.

Just pointing out some fundamental problems (especially on bug
or problem reports) and let them learn by own experience.

> it's not uncommon to see one comment saying why one person
> doesn't want to run it (perhaps to do with debuggability
> when it won't boot), to get a reply along the lines
> if "I use <distro du jour with systemd> and it works just fine -
> what's the problem ?"

It's the same as "windows run fine". Maybe for them it really is,
I couldn't care less. Just ignore these folks - they won't help
us in any way - we don't need them, they're just irrelevant.

> So there really is a problem to solve there.

It's their problem, not yours, not mine. So, just don't care,
unless they really ask for help. And if they do, there's a
simple and efficient answer: get rid of systemd. Period.

>> NAK. 1) is enought.
>> In the past we fought bigger dragons, eg. getting free from M$.
>
> I don't think that's comparable.

You're right. The MS dragon was magnitudes bigger.

>> Optional. We patch out the crap for packages we need, and drop those we
>> don't need.
>
> But it's a lot less ongoing effort to keep that support in upstream.

Yes, that's why we'd regularily post our patches to upstreams
(more precisely: let some scripts do that - don't waste precious
life time on dumb people)

> Yes you can patch it, but the more embedded systemd becomes, the
> more patching is needed.

Maybe, maybe not, we'll see. Challenge accepted.
And it only affects packages we really need, anyways.

Do we have any real trouble maker on the table right now ?
If so, do we need it or is it just useless toy like gnome3 ?

> Keep/get a critical mass so that upstream devs see a case for
> keeping the non-systemd stuff, and maintaining the non-systemd distro
> is less work.

In worst case, we can become our own upstream. Of course taking folks
from all the other non-systemd distros aboard.

>> Not, quite. Just rapair and support the original API - drop the
>> systemd crap entirely.
>
> I think you've missed the point. "Repair and support the original API"
> isn't an option if the upstream dev wants his package to be runable
> on a systemd system

Seems you missed my point, so to make it crystal clear: fuck off the
upstream. Collect the folks from the other distros, fork off and also
make big noise about that. Including using social technics to make those
upstreams feel really bad about their choice (at that point, we're in
the political sphere, so use political tools).

> And the team behind systemd have shown that they have no intension of
> fixing anything when they can better support their aims by deprecating
> it and bringing something new (and in their eyes, improved) to the table.

We all know that, had been said a thousand times, no need to repeat it
again and again. We all know that Lennartism is an ugly totalitarian
ideology. But as long as they're not making chaos in the streets and
start actually hurting people, we can easily ignore them (and even if
they did, we'd take care of that). Those psychopaths live from our
attention (because they just don't have anything else in their petty
miserable lifes) - don't give them this energy anymore, and they'll
sooner or later die. Alone.

The (few) Lennartists are not the folks we should care about, just like
w/ Fascists, Socialists, Satanists, and all the other insane ideologies.
Instead we should care about their blind followers. And most of them
only learn by pain.

> If the systemd devs showed the sort of attitude to the rest of the world

If we ever invest energy into these folks, then make they look as what
they really are: ridiculous petty psychopaths. We should never engage
them, just laugh about them.

> It's the very fact that they appear to be forcing this binary choice
> (systemd or nothing) is why we're having this discussion.

No, it's the fact that they have so many dumb, brainwashed followers.

> That's why I suggest it's important to keep the upstream devs onside

Depends on what you exactly mean by "onside". If it's about feeding them
with bugfixes (and systemd dependency *is* a bug, a critical one), then
we aggree. But we should make it crystal clear, that we'll do whatever
it takes to keep our systems free from Lennartware. Especially including
the option of a fork. (and that, of course, also includes eradicating
libsystemd0)

Yet again, we're in the area of politicts. Actually on the geopolitical
scale. So, we gotta act like that. We'll defend our homeland by any
means necessary - no surrender, no retreat.

> Over time that will change - systemd will get deeper and deeper into
> packages, and it will get harder and harder to remove it, and to add
> in the now missing parts.

On any such patch, fire back. And don't miss a chance to put lots of
salt in the wound.

To be more practical: I'd suggest spinning off a (distro agnostic)
non-systemd maintenance project. We'll collect repos w/ depotterization
patches for all packages (and upstream releases) we're interested in.
And any distro can easily join in.

Just created a github org for that:
https://github.com/depotter

Started w/ a pretty trivial case: samba
https://github.com/depotter/samba


--mtx