Am 19.12.2017 um 10:23 schrieb Jaromil:
>
> dear Michael,
>
> On Tue, 19 Dec 2017, Michael Siegel wrote:
>
>> 1.
>> The intro paragraph says:
>> "Erklärtes Ziel ist es, nicht den umstrittenen systemd-Dienst als
>> 'init'-Prozess fest vorzugeben, sondern die Wahl des init-Prozesses dem
>> Anwender zu überlassen und ein möglichst breites Spektrum an
>> init-Systemen zu unterstützen wie es auch in Debian möglich ist.[2]"
>>
>> That translates to: "The stated aim is not to prescribe the
>> controversial systemd service as the 'init' system, but leave the choice
>> of the init system to the user and to support a preferably wide range of
>> init systems like it is also possible in Debian.[2]"
>>
>> Question: How does Debian support a wide range of init systems? Even the
>> claim that supporting a variety of init systems is possible with Debian
>> is at least a half-truth if you take into account what it takes to not
>> use systemd.
>>
>> The source cited in the footnote is https://devuan.org/os/init-freedom.
>> That web page, however, doesn't state it as Devuan's aim to support a
>> preferably wide range of init systems, but rather to "restor[e] a sane
>> approach to PID1". And, of course, it doesn't claim Debian was able to
>> support a variety of init systems. It actually states the opposite, stating:
>> "While Debian claims that 'Systemd is becoming the de facto standard
>> init system for Linux', a number of GNU/Linux distributions, some new,
>> beg to differ. While Debian claims that 'It is better than existing
>> alternatives for all of Debian's current use cases', these rebel
>> GNU/Linux distributions refuse this one-size-fits-all vision of the *nix
>> world that breaks portability, ignores backwards compatibility, and
>> replaces existing services, forcing systemd into adoption."
>>
>> The sentence that follows the one quoted above makes things even worse:
>> "Im Gegensatz zu Debian entfernt Devuan allerdings die Unterstützung für
>> systemd."
>>
>> Translated: "But contrary to Debian, Devuan removes support for systemd."
>>
>> To sum up: Devuan doesn't want to enforece systemd onto its users but
>> leave them a choice and support a variety of init systems. But that is
>> also possible with Debian. Only Devuan removes support for systemd.
>>
>> That's not exactly right, is it?
>
> I believe this is correct and in line with our proposition. As a
> matter of fact we are fixing init packages that do not work in Debian,
> for instance OpenRC, nothwithstanding sysvinit stays the default, also
> in ASCII.

The point I was trying to make there, was that the way the article
states those facts is misleading, not that they are actually untrue. It
just really provokes the question "So, why use Devuan at all?" in kind
of a strange way. And as a whole, it gives a wrong impression of what
Devuan is.

Could you or someone else maybe comment on the above in more detail,
especially on the question of support and choice of init systems in
Debian? I have now watched the video linked on
https://devuan.org/os/init-freedom and found that talking about Debian's
way of packaging OpenRC at the end of your presentation, you actually
give an example of Debian making it hard to use other init systems.

As I understand it, Debian making it hard to use anything else than
systemd is actually the main reason for Devuan's existence.

>> 2.
>> A few paragraphs later, the article claims that Devuan was also aiming
>> to "make it possible" to use systemd, provided its integration won't
>> collide with other init systems or create incompatibilities: "Auch
>> systemd soll ermöglicht werden, sofern die Integration ohne Kollision
>> mit anderen init-Systemen oder Inkompatibilitäten möglich ist.[2]"
>>
>> What did that footnote point to again? Right,
>> https://devuan.org/os/init-freedom .
>>
>> Now, that is an obvious mismatch.
>
> No, this is correct too. If systemd would be only an init we'd be fine
> with it. Also please note our problem is specifically with Debian
> where a weak and manipulated majority has unresponsibly taken over and
> decided to impose systemd to everyone, disregarding what the users
> were asking and in fact violating its social contract.
>
> I explain this in the video linked from that page.

I see. The article should better cite that video directly whenever it
draws on your presentation at FSCONS.

Also, systemd restricting itself to only being an init system seems to
go fundamentally against its design principles which in turn makes
inclusion into Devuan very unlikely, doesn't it?

[snip]

>> 5.
>> Maybe someone should provide a screen shot of a Devuan Jessie desktop
>> with Xfce in place.
>
> Golinux is the best one to do that.

Right. I'll ask her.

> Many thanks for your attention to details!

Thanks for your reply!


Best,

msi