Insidious systemd

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
58 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lightweight wifi UI (Was: Insidious systemd)

Patrick Bartek-2
On Sat, 1 Jun 2019 14:30:38 +0200
Vincent Lefevre <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 2019-05-29 20:47:06 +0300, Reco wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 05:39:05PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:  
> > > On 2019-05-28 11:18:39 -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:  
> > > > On Tue, 28 May 2019 20:39:53 +0300
> > > > Reco <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >  
> > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 09:49:45AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:  
> > > > > > On Tue, 28 May 2019 18:56:44 +0300
> > > > > > Reco <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > > apt/apt-get already by default set NOT to install Recommends, only
> > > > > > dependencies.  And I check before installing anything just to be sure.    
> > > > >
> > > > > Yet your apt tries to install gksu, and mine does not.  
> > > >
> > > > I'll check.  It could be a dependency of a wicd dependency.  
> > >
> > > No, there isn't any dependency, even recursively:
> > >  
> > > ypig:~> apt install -s wicd  
> > > [...]
> > > The following additional packages will be installed:
> > >   python-glade2 python-notify python-wicd rfkill wicd-daemon wicd-gtk
> > >   wireless-tools
> > > [...]  
> >
> > $ apt-cache show wicd-gtk | grep Recommends
> > Recommends: gksu, python-notify
> >
> > Things might be different in buster or sid, of course. This is stretch.  
>
> Yes, this has changed:
>
> ypig:~> apt-cache show wicd-gtk | grep Recommends  
> Recommends: policykit-1 | menu | kde-runtime, python-notify
> Recommends: gksu, python-notify
>
> But anyway, this was just a Recommends, and the OP had apt configured
> not to install Recommends by default.

I checked that and some time ago had set Recommends back to install by
default, but had forgotten.  When I initially installed Stretch last
year I had set Recommends not to install as a precaution against
systemd reinstalling itself which it tried to a lot.  That changed
after about a month or so.  After a while since I was having to install
some Recommends by hand anyway as apps were complaining, I set it back.

I apologize for my forgetfulness.

B

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Insidious systemd

Patrick Bartek-2
In reply to this post by Vincent Lefevre-10
On Sat, 1 Jun 2019 14:39:41 +0200
Vincent Lefevre <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 2019-05-29 12:01:44 -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > On Wed, 29 May 2019 17:43:49 +0200
> > Vincent Lefevre <[hidden email]> wrote:  
> > > He shouldn't. I've a machine that is still under sysvinit, and
> > > I can install wicd without any dependency issue.  
> >
> > What version OS you running? Fully up-to-date? GNOME? Or something else?  
>
> Debian/unstable (which should now be very similar to testing), fully
> up-to-date except a few unrelated packages. Various GNOME packages
> installed.

Maybe, the "problem's" been fixed.

> Note: The dependency resolvers are sometimes wrong, sometimes wanting
> to remove/replace packages even when this is not needed. In such a
> case, a solution is to provide packages you want to keep, e.g. for
> sysvinit-core:

Could be the reason, but I shouldn't have to do that.  That's why I
don't think an init system should every be a dependency of the system or
any app.  None of the others are.  Why does systemd have to be?

Thanks for your advice.

B


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Insidious systemd

David Wright-3
On Sat 01 Jun 2019 at 20:53:47 (-0700), Patrick Bartek wrote:

> On Sat, 1 Jun 2019 14:39:41 +0200 Vincent Lefevre <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On 2019-05-29 12:01:44 -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > > On Wed, 29 May 2019 17:43:49 +0200 Vincent Lefevre <[hidden email]> wrote:  
> > > > He shouldn't. I've a machine that is still under sysvinit, and
> > > > I can install wicd without any dependency issue.  
> > >
> > > What version OS you running? Fully up-to-date? GNOME? Or something else?  
> >
> > Debian/unstable (which should now be very similar to testing), fully
> > up-to-date except a few unrelated packages. Various GNOME packages
> > installed.
>
> Maybe, the "problem's" been fixed.

Which problem, the error in your apt configuration,
or the alleged dependency?

> > Note: The dependency resolvers are sometimes wrong, sometimes wanting
> > to remove/replace packages even when this is not needed. In such a
> > case, a solution is to provide packages you want to keep, e.g. for
> > sysvinit-core:
>
> Could be the reason, but I shouldn't have to do that.  That's why I
> don't think an init system should every be a dependency of the system or
> any app.  None of the others are.  Why does systemd have to be?

What is the actual dependency that you're complaining about, ie which
specific package depends on which? I can't follow exactly how far
you've rolled back your original complaint.

Cheers,
David.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lightweight wifi UI (Was: Insidious systemd)

David Wright-3
In reply to this post by Patrick Bartek-2
On Wed 29 May 2019 at 11:01:58 (-0700), Patrick Bartek wrote:

> Is Debian slowly becoming systemd proprietary?  It would be a great
> loss to Linux and its philosophy if true.  But that looks to be the
> direction Debian is headed.
>
> Once I suggested on this list when systemd first debuted with Jessie
> about choosing an init at install time as an option. It was not well
> received.  Many said it couldn't be done or was impractical. My reply
> was, if you can change inits AFTER the install completes, why not
> BEFORE.

I think it's beneficial to keep the d-i as simple as possible.
Once you've installed the system, all the tools are now available
for changing the init system to whichever one you choose. Adding
that to the d-i just bloats it (for everyone) without any
*essential* benefit to anyone.

> The thread died of apathy shortly thereafter with no resolution.

Perhaps because you didn't supply any patches for switching to
even one other init system (within the d-i, or as a post-installation
script).

Cheers,
David.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lightweight wifi UI (Was: Insidious systemd)

Patrick Bartek-2
On Sun, 2 Jun 2019 00:29:30 -0500
David Wright <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Wed 29 May 2019 at 11:01:58 (-0700), Patrick Bartek wrote:
>
> > Is Debian slowly becoming systemd proprietary?  It would be a great
> > loss to Linux and its philosophy if true.  But that looks to be the
> > direction Debian is headed.
> >
> > Once I suggested on this list when systemd first debuted with Jessie
> > about choosing an init at install time as an option. It was not well
> > received.  Many said it couldn't be done or was impractical. My reply
> > was, if you can change inits AFTER the install completes, why not
> > BEFORE.  
>
> I think it's beneficial to keep the d-i as simple as possible.
> Once you've installed the system, all the tools are now available
> for changing the init system to whichever one you choose. Adding
> that to the d-i just bloats it (for everyone) without any
> *essential* benefit to anyone.

The install includes lots of choices like print server, server or
desktop system, GUI, laptop utilities, etc. that are "bloat-worthy" and
can be installed after the main install has completed.  I know.  I used
to do it back in the day. I still do to a certain extent even today.
But now those choices are an integral part of the install.  So, why not
init? Can't even spare a few hundred K? Ridiculous irrantionale. We're
talking CD/DVDs not floppies.

As far as what constitutes "essential": Shouldn't the user decide
that?  Or, at least, have a say so?  What has happened to the basic
philosophy of good business: Satisfy the customer?

I'm not against systemd, per se, just against having it forced on me
by way of dependencies. I don't think the init should ever be a
dependency. Of anything.  It's too basic to the system.  

> > The thread died of apathy shortly thereafter with no resolution.  
>
> Perhaps because you didn't supply any patches for switching to
> even one other init system (within the d-i, or as a post-installation
> script).

Didn't need scripts.  Debian already had the ability to switch to
sysvinit (probably because so many objected to systemd) by simply
installing sysvinit-core.  If it's that simple, why not make it part of
the install.  Yes, you won't be able to use GNOME, but freedom of choice
comes with consequences as do all choices.

B

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Insidious systemd

Patrick Bartek-2
In reply to this post by David Wright-3
On Sun, 2 Jun 2019 00:09:21 -0500
David Wright <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Sat 01 Jun 2019 at 20:53:47 (-0700), Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > On Sat, 1 Jun 2019 14:39:41 +0200 Vincent Lefevre <[hidden email]> wrote:  
> > > On 2019-05-29 12:01:44 -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:  
> > > > On Wed, 29 May 2019 17:43:49 +0200 Vincent Lefevre <[hidden email]> wrote:    
> > > > > He shouldn't. I've a machine that is still under sysvinit, and
> > > > > I can install wicd without any dependency issue.    
> > > >
> > > > What version OS you running? Fully up-to-date? GNOME? Or something else?    
> > >
> > > Debian/unstable (which should now be very similar to testing), fully
> > > up-to-date except a few unrelated packages. Various GNOME packages
> > > installed.  
> >
> > Maybe, the "problem's" been fixed.  
>
> Which problem, the error in your apt configuration,
> or the alleged dependency?

Whatever caused systemd to want to be installed on my Stretch
system, but not on Buster or Sid when installing wicd which explicitly
states having no systemd dependency.

> > > Note: The dependency resolvers are sometimes wrong, sometimes wanting
> > > to remove/replace packages even when this is not needed. In such a
> > > case, a solution is to provide packages you want to keep, e.g. for
> > > sysvinit-core:  
> >
> > Could be the reason, but I shouldn't have to do that.  That's why I
> > don't think an init system should every be a dependency of the system or
> > any app.  None of the others are.  Why does systemd have to be?  
>
> What is the actual dependency that you're complaining about, ie which
> specific package depends on which? I can't follow exactly how far
> you've rolled back your original complaint.

Someone traced that down.  Seems the systemd dependency is from a
Recommend or two for wicd. But this is all academic now.  I've decided
to abandoned wicd.  wifi-radar looked good and installed without a
hitch.

B

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lightweight wifi UI (Was: Insidious systemd)

didier.gaumet
In reply to this post by Patrick Bartek-2
Le 03/06/2019 à 07:23, Patrick Bartek a écrit :
[...]
> The install includes lots of choices [...] So, why not
> init?

I think a Debian maintainer had answered in the past something like
while not using systemd himself, he admitted the perceived percentage of
Debian anti-systemd users was not so important to justify it, because
one can relatively easily desinstall systemd and install sysv after install.

It seems that you do not even need to install systemd (as the init
system) at all during a fresh install (if you don't install a full blown
DE)?
   https://wiki.debian.org/systemd#Installing_without_systemd

[...]
> I'm not against systemd, per se, just against having it forced on me
> by way of dependencies. I don't think the init should ever be a
> dependency. Of anything.
[...]
for a modern DE at least, systemd seems to be a requirement, but not as
an init system?
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systemd#Ancillary_components

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lightweight wifi UI (Was: Insidious systemd)

Kenneth Parker-2

I wish to add one thing to this Discussion.  Mention was made, more than once, that wicd "might" require Systemd.  

Besides using Debian Stretch on one system (where I am happily learning Systemd), I use Devuan Ascii (on an older machine with limited ram).

This is "official notification" that wicd works fine on Devuan Ascii, meaning that, as far as I know, nothing in wicd actually references Systemd.

Good luck folks!

Kenneth Parker (Tri-Lingual:  Debian, Devuan and Ubuntu.  No Windows, however).

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lightweight wifi UI (Was: Insidious systemd)

Dan Ritter-4
In reply to this post by didier.gaumet
didier gaumet wrote:
> Le 03/06/2019 à 07:23, Patrick Bartek a écrit :
> [...]
> > The install includes lots of choices [...] So, why not
> > init?
>
> I think a Debian maintainer had answered in the past something like
> while not using systemd himself, he admitted the perceived percentage of
> Debian anti-systemd users was not so important to justify it, because
> one can relatively easily desinstall systemd and install sysv after install.

There's a big problem with the popularity argument: it depends
on popcon, and popcon is overwhelmingly not installed by people
who care about security... who are likely to be professional
sysadmins.


> for a modern DE at least, systemd seems to be a requirement, but not as
> an init system?
>  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systemd#Ancillary_components

Correct, at least until Buster's GNOME, which will require it.
Hopefully Buster's XFCE will not; I don't know.

-dsr-

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lightweight wifi UI (Was: Insidious systemd)

Greg Wooledge
In reply to this post by Patrick Bartek-2
On Sun, Jun 02, 2019 at 10:23:25PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> The install includes lots of choices like print server, server or
> desktop system, GUI, laptop utilities, etc. that are "bloat-worthy" and
> can be installed after the main install has completed.  I know.  I used
> to do it back in the day. I still do to a certain extent even today.
> But now those choices are an integral part of the install.  So, why not
> init?

Because a non-negligible number of people care about Desktop Environments,
and Print Servers, and SSH Servers.

Almost nobody cares about init systems.

Yes, you and your 3 friends care DEEPLY and PASSIONATELY about this.  I
get that.  But there's only 4 of you, not 4000.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lightweight wifi UI (Was: Insidious systemd)

Dan Ritter-4
Greg Wooledge wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 02, 2019 at 10:23:25PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > The install includes lots of choices like print server, server or
> > desktop system, GUI, laptop utilities, etc. that are "bloat-worthy" and
> > can be installed after the main install has completed.  I know.  I used
> > to do it back in the day. I still do to a certain extent even today.
> > But now those choices are an integral part of the install.  So, why not
> > init?
>
> Because a non-negligible number of people care about Desktop Environments,
> and Print Servers, and SSH Servers.
>
> Almost nobody cares about init systems.
>
> Yes, you and your 3 friends care DEEPLY and PASSIONATELY about this.  I
> get that.  But there's only 4 of you, not 4000.

Greg --

is that the sort of argument you feel proud to be making?

-dsr-

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lightweight wifi UI (Was: Insidious systemd)

Greg Wooledge
On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 09:11:37AM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
> Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > Almost nobody cares about init systems.
> >
> > Yes, you and your 3 friends care DEEPLY and PASSIONATELY about this.  I
> > get that.  But there's only 4 of you, not 4000.
>
> Greg --
>
> is that the sort of argument you feel proud to be making?

Yes.  I do not believe Debian should bend over backward, spending many
hours of development time, to appease a handful of zealots who can
achieve their personal goals with three minutes of work.

If someone strongly disagrees with this, they can create their own
personalized installer, or they can switch to Devuan.

Now, open your eyes.  The real goal of these zealots is not to save
three minutes of work when they install.  It is to shove their political
agenda into the spotlight.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lightweight wifi UI (Was: Insidious systemd)

Dan Ritter-4
Greg Wooledge wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 09:11:37AM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > > Almost nobody cares about init systems.
> > >
> > > Yes, you and your 3 friends care DEEPLY and PASSIONATELY about this.  I
> > > get that.  But there's only 4 of you, not 4000.
> >
> > Greg --
> >
> > is that the sort of argument you feel proud to be making?
>
> Yes.  I do not believe Debian should bend over backward, spending many
> hours of development time, to appease a handful of zealots who can
> achieve their personal goals with three minutes of work.
>
> If someone strongly disagrees with this, they can create their own
> personalized installer, or they can switch to Devuan.
>
> Now, open your eyes.  The real goal of these zealots is not to save
> three minutes of work when they install.  It is to shove their political
> agenda into the spotlight.

Thanks for announcing that people who care what init system they
are running are zealots. I had thought that I was a professional
with a valid technical point of view, but my eyes are now open.
I realize that no objection I can possibly make is worthwhile.

Perhaps I too will start making arguments that people should stop
complaining about things because they are not in the majority.

Presumably I was also wrong about politics being the alternative
to war. That can only happen when people respect each other.

-dsr-

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lightweight wifi UI (Was: Insidious systemd)

tomas@tuxteam.de
On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 10:17:00AM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
> Greg Wooledge wrote:

[...]

> > Now, open your eyes.  The real goal of these zealots [...]

> Thanks for announcing that people who care what init system they
> are running are zealots [...]

Folks. Can we just get along?

To the one side: if we want something to happen (e.g. keeping
SysV init viable), it's on us to help making it. To the other
side: "you don't exist" has been one of the most offending
insults in this unfortunate spat.

Please stop it.

Thanks

signature.asc (205 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lightweight wifi UI (Was: Insidious systemd)

Patrick Bartek-2
In reply to this post by didier.gaumet
On Mon, 3 Jun 2019 09:43:36 +0200
didier gaumet <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Le 03/06/2019 à 07:23, Patrick Bartek a écrit :
> [...]
> > The install includes lots of choices [...] So, why not
> > init?  
>
> I think a Debian maintainer had answered in the past something like
> while not using systemd himself, he admitted the perceived percentage of
> Debian anti-systemd users was not so important to justify it, because
> one can relatively easily desinstall systemd and install sysv after install.

That's what they said, yes, among other things.  But when your default
desktop environment GNOME has systemd (or parts of it) as a dependency,
and as time is money, the developers took the path of least
resistance.

No, you can't uninstall all of systemd easily and still have the system
work: too many dependency issues.  You can, however, easily replace
systemd-init with sysvinit while leaving systemd libraries still
installed.  In fact, the process in documented in the install docs
which is what I finally decided to do after lots of research and trial
installs.

Some had suggested I go with Devuan, if I wanted to be free of systemd,
but at the time -- a couple years ago -- Devuan IMHO wasn't ready for
prime time.

> It seems that you do not even need to install systemd (as the init
> system) at all during a fresh install (if you don't install a full blown
> DE)?
>    https://wiki.debian.org/systemd#Installing_without_systemd

Now that I look at it, I read that years ago, but all the preseeding
does is install sysvinit after the system install with systemd is
complete. Just as easy to do it manually.  To make as basic a system
as possible, I started with a terminal only install, switched to
sysvinit, and installed only what I needed, component by component.

> [...]
> > I'm not against systemd, per se, just against having it forced on me
> > by way of dependencies. I don't think the init should ever be a
> > dependency. Of anything.  
> [...]
> for a modern DE at least, systemd seems to be a requirement, but not as
> an init system?
>  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systemd#Ancillary_components

Unfortuanately, as all those ancillary components are not
independent but interrelated, you're going to get unexpected
systemd "gotchas" just as I did with wicd.  I solved it by picking
another wifi manager which really has no relations to GNOME or systemd.

B

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lightweight wifi UI (Was: Insidious systemd)

Patrick Bartek-2
In reply to this post by Kenneth Parker-2
On Mon, 3 Jun 2019 04:21:18 -0400
Kenneth Parker <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I wish to add one thing to this Discussion.  Mention was made, more than
> once, that wicd "might" require Systemd.

It's not wicd that has the systemd dependency, it's one or a few
wicd Recommends that do. Block those from installing and no systemd
reinstall.  But that's all academic now.  I went with another wifi
manager.

> Besides using Debian Stretch on one system (where I am happily learning
> Systemd), I use Devuan Ascii (on an older machine with limited ram).
>
> This is "official notification" that wicd works fine on Devuan Ascii,
> meaning that, as far as I know, nothing in wicd actually references Systemd.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lightweight wifi UI (Was: Insidious systemd)

David Wright-3
In reply to this post by Patrick Bartek-2
On Sun 02 Jun 2019 at 22:23:25 (-0700), Patrick Bartek wrote:

> On Sun, 2 Jun 2019 00:29:30 -0500 David Wright <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On Wed 29 May 2019 at 11:01:58 (-0700), Patrick Bartek wrote:
> >
> > > Is Debian slowly becoming systemd proprietary?  It would be a great
> > > loss to Linux and its philosophy if true.  But that looks to be the
> > > direction Debian is headed.
> > >
> > > Once I suggested on this list when systemd first debuted with Jessie
> > > about choosing an init at install time as an option. It was not well
> > > received.  Many said it couldn't be done or was impractical. My reply
> > > was, if you can change inits AFTER the install completes, why not
> > > BEFORE.  
> >
> > I think it's beneficial to keep the d-i as simple as possible.
> > Once you've installed the system, all the tools are now available
> > for changing the init system to whichever one you choose. Adding
> > that to the d-i just bloats it (for everyone) without any
> > *essential* benefit to anyone.
>
> The install includes lots of choices like print server, server or
> desktop system, GUI, laptop utilities, etc. that are "bloat-worthy" and
> can be installed after the main install has completed.  I know.  I used
> to do it back in the day. I still do to a certain extent even today.
> But now those choices are an integral part of the install.  So, why not
> init? Can't even spare a few hundred K? Ridiculous irrantionale. We're
> talking CD/DVDs not floppies.

I can't see any of those items in the d-i itself, with the exception
of laptop-detect (6162 bytes). They're all pulled in from Debian
mirror which doesn't cause bloat. Where I see varities of packages
that I don't use, they are essentials like fonts (for non-English
speakers) and strange (to me) partition handlers. Oh, and lilo makes
an appearance (~400K) as well as grub.

> As far as what constitutes "essential": Shouldn't the user decide
> that?  Or, at least, have a say so?  What has happened to the basic
> philosophy of good business: Satisfy the customer?

"Essential" is what you need to install a system that works (and
can boot itself up and initialise itself) and has the functionality
for you to be able to change init system (and anything else) if
you want to. That's my reading.

Cheers,
David.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lightweight wifi UI (Was: Insidious systemd)

David Wright-3
In reply to this post by Patrick Bartek-2
On Mon 03 Jun 2019 at 21:07:51 (-0700), Patrick Bartek wrote:

> Unfortuanately, as all those ancillary components are not
> independent but interrelated, you're going to get unexpected
> systemd "gotchas" just as I did with wicd.  I solved it by picking
> another wifi manager which really has no relations to GNOME or systemd.

I thought you'd establish that the wicd "gotcha" was actually
caused by the fact that you'd accidentally set Recommends to
install and forgotten about it.
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2019/06/msg00034.html

Cheers,
David.

123