Yes, there is some Linux-envy. For example, while systemd itself is Linux- only, some in the BSD camp have been working on a systemd-looklike called ?InitWare?. Also they see the need to move off X11 at some point and onto Wayland. Linux containers are also another area which the BSDs cannot
quite match functionally. And there?s the network stack etc etc.
On 2025-06-14, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Yes, there is some Linux-envy. For example, while systemd itself is Linux- >> only, some in the BSD camp have been working on a systemd-looklike called
?InitWare?. Also they see the need to move off X11 at some point and onto
Wayland. Linux containers are also another area which the BSDs cannot
quite match functionally. And there?s the network stack etc etc.
WTH is this dogma about forced moving from X11 to Wayland all about ? :-(
It seems that the old approach of gradually introducing the "new thing"
as an alternative while fixing any limitations or issues then identified (when compared to the "old way") no longer exists.
If you introduce a replacement something, it should at least do everything the old "something" did, yet the Wayland people are so full of themselves they think they can just force the use of Wayland without considering how
it breaks existing applications (including major ones such as KiCad).
Are the Wayland people being secretly funded by Microsoft ? :-(
Simon.
Looks political, in the same way that I saw systemd as a power grab by RedHat.
Are the Wayland people being secretly funded by Microsoft ? :-(
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> spake the secret code
<102sa93$2hhm5$1@dont-email.me> thusly:
Are the Wayland people being secretly funded by Microsoft ? :-(
Not Microsoft, IBM/RedHat.
Richard, if you do not want email follow up, remove your Reply to Header!
On 6/17/25 23:15, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 21:35:28 +0100, chrisq wrote:
Looks political, in the same way that I saw systemd as a power grab by
RedHat.
The number one rule for any good conspiracy theory: “Cui bono?” aka “Who
benefits?”, aka “Follow the money”.
What kind of business model is it for Red Hat to force competitors into
using its products for free? Even assuming it has the kind of market
muscle to achieve that, which it doesn’t.
Good try, but Red Hat is now IBM, so you have ask yourself, is it good
that any single, powerful organisation should have so much influence
over the future direction of Linux ?. Since no mainstream Linux will run without systemd in place, I would say that the trojan horse has achieved
its objective.
As for money, Red Hat, Suse and others, all make good money from their support services, and are doing very well thanks. Good luck to them,
but it was easier for me to dump Linux and run FreeBSD, which has zfs
root options at boot / install time, and is a far more professional and stable looking OS.
Linus is now just a good windows replacement, but would never use it for serious work now. Far too much dross and trying to be all things to all
men.
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 21:35:28 +0100, chrisq wrote:
Looks political, in the same way that I saw systemd as a power grab by
RedHat.
The number one rule for any good conspiracy theory: “Cui bono?” aka “Who
benefits?”, aka “Follow the money”.
What kind of business model is it for Red Hat to force competitors into
using its products for free? Even assuming it has the kind of market
muscle to achieve that, which it doesn’t.
Since no mainstream Linux will run without systemd in place ...
On Thu, 19 Jun 2025 00:47:00 +0100, chrisq wrote:
Since no mainstream Linux will run without systemd in place ...
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Linux_distributions_without_systemd>
On Thu, 19 Jun 2025 00:47:00 +0100, chrisq wrote:
Since no mainstream Linux will run without systemd in place ...
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Linux_distributions_without_systemd>
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
Chris Townley <news@cct-net.co.uk> spake the secret code <102usa0$31udb$1@dont-email.me> thusly:
Richard, if you do not want email follow up, remove your Reply to Header!
That's not how usenet works.
On 6/18/2025 7:47 PM, chrisq wrote:
On 6/17/25 23:15, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 21:35:28 +0100, chrisq wrote:
Looks political, in the same way that I saw systemd as a power grab by >>>> RedHat.
The number one rule for any good conspiracy theory: “Cui bono?” aka “Who
benefits?”, aka “Follow the money”.
What kind of business model is it for Red Hat to force competitors into
using its products for free? Even assuming it has the kind of market
muscle to achieve that, which it doesn’t.
Good try, but Red Hat is now IBM, so you have ask yourself, is it good
that any single, powerful organisation should have so much influence
over the future direction of Linux ?. Since no mainstream Linux will run
without systemd in place, I would say that the trojan horse has
achieved its objective.
As for money, Red Hat, Suse and others, all make good money from their
support services, and are doing very well thanks. Good luck to them,
Note that Redhat (and smaller like SUSE) are not making as much money
as they did 10 years ago. And as a consequence their power over Linux
has also diminished.
The reason is that people have been moving from on-prem and pure IaaS
cloud to other cloud options - EKS, AKS etc.. And that has meant
a change from the paid enterprise Linuxes to various free options
(cloud providers own Linux distro and Ubuntu).
but it was easier for me to dump Linux and run FreeBSD, which has zfs
root options at boot / install time, and is a far more professional and
stable looking OS.
Linus is now just a good windows replacement, but would never use it for
serious work now. Far too much dross and trying to be all things to all
men.
????
The majority of servers today run Linux and Kubernetes.
Linux servers must outnumber *BSD servers by factor 100 or 1000.
Usage may not be a good indicator of technical quality but it
is an indicator of fit for business purpose.
Arne
Not an industry insider, but always did like older Suse and also
Debian, but was quite disappointed when Debian moved over to the
dark side.
It just offends every concept of good system design. primarily
partitioning of function and encapsualtion. It's just so wrong,
amazing it has got so far.
Yes, thanks, know about devuan and others. Installed and looked at
it, but still remnants of systemd that can't be removed, even if we
are told it doesn't do anything. That's a compromise, not software engineering.
Working in embedded real time, I like tight, efficient and lightweight design, which modern Linux doesn't understand at all.
On 6/18/2025 7:55 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jun 2025 00:47:00 +0100, chrisq wrote:
Since no mainstream Linux will run without systemd in place ...
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Linux_distributions_without_systemd>
And?
I don't see any mainstream server true OS Linux on that list (*).
Mainstream is really Redhat in all the dozens of flavors and clones,
SUSE, Ubuntu and Debian.
Not an industry insider, but always did like older Suse and also
Debian, but was quite disappointed when Debian moved over to the
dark side. They must have thought they had good reason and perhaps
that was the way things were going, as systemd might make system
management easier at a superficial level. That is, deskilling at that
level, but a devil to debug and opaque if something serious breaks.
It just offends every concept of good system design. primarily
partitioning of function and encapsualtion. It's just so wrong,
amazing it has got so far.
systemd has supposedly reached 1.7 MLOC.
VSI could not add that to VMS.
*BSD teams could not add that to *BSD.
There is a big difference between letting a kid into a candy store with
10 dollars vs with a credit card with no limit.
*) server to exclude Android and ChromeOS/ChromiumOS which are
widely used on non-servers, true OS to exclude Alpine that
is widely used for container userland
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> spake the secret code
<102sa93$2hhm5$1@dont-email.me> thusly:
Are the Wayland people being secretly funded by Microsoft ? :-(
Not Microsoft, IBM/RedHat.
On Thu, 19 Jun 2025 01:28:55 +0100, chrisq wrote:
Yes, thanks, know about devuan and others. Installed and looked at
it, but still remnants of systemd that can't be removed, even if we
are told it doesn't do anything. That's a compromise, not software
engineering.
Obviously you need to show us how it?s done, then.
Working in embedded real time, I like tight, efficient and lightweight
design, which modern Linux doesn't understand at all.
Oh yes it does. Look at what is being done with a Raspberry Pi, for
example.
Linux fits into a phone. What have you done that can compete with Android?
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 21:35:28 +0100, chrisq wrote:
Looks political, in the same way that I saw systemd as a power grab by
RedHat.
The number one rule for any good conspiracy theory: “Cui bono?” aka “Who
benefits?”, aka “Follow the money”.
What kind of business model is it for Red Hat to force competitors into
using its products for free? Even assuming it has the kind of market
muscle to achieve that, which it doesn’t.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
The number one rule for any good conspiracy theory: “Cui bono?” aka “Who
benefits?”, aka “Follow the money”.
What kind of business model is it for Red Hat to force competitors into
using its products for free? Even assuming it has the kind of market
muscle to achieve that, which it doesn’t.
You pretend that you do not understand how it works.
Red Hat has its customers and to maximize profits wants control of
what is included in Linux.
Systemd is very intrusive, require changes to a lot of programs.
Trying to keep systemd as a proprietary add-on would mean much more
effort on part of Red Hat.
More generally, since components of a Linux distribution are
open source, anybody can start a new Linux distribution.
Red Hat clearly want some barries of entry for potential
competitors.
<conspiracy theory>
And concerning secret funding by Microsoft: Microsoft
realised that it can not stop adoption of Linux.
So the next best thing for them would be to control
Linux. ATM they can not do this. But if complexity
of Linux grows eventually it will reach level that
only Microsoft can manage.
On Sat, 21 Jun 2025 01:25:59 -0000 (UTC), Waldek Hebisch wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
The number one rule for any good conspiracy theory: “Cui bono?” aka “Who
benefits?”, aka “Follow the money”.
What kind of business model is it for Red Hat to force competitors into
using its products for free? Even assuming it has the kind of market
muscle to achieve that, which it doesn’t.
More generally, since components of a Linux distribution are
open source, anybody can start a new Linux distribution.
Red Hat clearly want some barries of entry for potential
competitors.
systemd does not do that. It, too, is fully open source, after all.
It’s a component you can choose to include, or not, when creating your
own distro.
<conspiracy theory>
And concerning secret funding by Microsoft: Microsoft
realised that it can not stop adoption of Linux.
So the next best thing for them would be to control
Linux. ATM they can not do this. But if complexity
of Linux grows eventually it will reach level that
only Microsoft can manage.
Given that systemd is not actually any part of Linux -- it’s a purely userland thing -- it’s not clear how encouraging that would lead to
such an outcome. Could you clarify how this is supposed to happen?
Systemd increases complexity ...
Microsoft probably does not care much about Linux kernel.
Similarly, if Microsoft decieded to replace its kernel by Linux
kernel Windows would be as proprietary as it is now.
And fact that Linux kernel is GPL and shipped as part of WSL
does not change fact that Windows is proprietary.
It is hard to say what _exactly_ Miscrosoft will do, they have many possibilities.
Historically, grassroot contributions where important to Linux. And
they were possible because of limited complexity and presence of
advanced users. But deskilling of system administration and growing
opacity of system is going to limit this.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 505 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 65:41:29 |
| Calls: | 9,927 |
| Calls today: | 3 |
| Files: | 13,804 |
| Messages: | 6,348,791 |
| Posted today: | 2 |