NSA: Please Turn off the Lights When You Leave. Nothing to See Here.

Linux Advocate Dietrich Schmitz shows how the general public can take action to truly protect their privacy using GnuPG with Evolution email. Read the details.

Mailvelope for Chrome: PGP Encrypted Email Made Easy

Linux Advocate Dietrich Schmitz officially endorses what he deems is a truly secure, easy to use PGP email encryption program. Read the details.

Step off Microsoft's License Treadmill to FOSS Linux

Linux Advocate Dietrich Schmitz reminds CIOs that XP Desktops destined for MS end of life support can be reprovisioned with FOSS Linux to run like brand new. Read how.

Bitcoin is NOT Money -- it's a Commodity

Linux Advocate shares news that the U.S. Treasury will treat Bitcoin as a Commodity 'Investment'. Read the details.

Google Drive Gets a Failing Grade on Privacy Protection

Linux Advocate Dietrich Schmitz puts out a public service privacy warning. Google Drive gets a failing grade on protecting your privacy.

Email: A Fundamentally Broken System

Email needs an overhaul. Privacy must be integrated.

Opinion

Cookie Cutter Distros Don't Cut It

Opinion

The 'Linux Inside' Stigma - It's real and it's a problem.

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Turn a Deaf Ear

Linux Advocate Dietrich Schmitz reminds readers of a long ago failed petition by Mathematician Prof. Donald Knuth for stopping issuance of Software Patents.

Showing posts with label Patrick Volkerding. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Patrick Volkerding. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 30, 2013

Slackware: Is Systemd Inevitable?

by Dietrich Schmitz

I recently wrote a story Systemd: The New Pulse Audio as regards the work undertaken by Red Hat and one employee +Lennart Poettering to improve Linux with a middleware daemon called systemd.

Much press has been given to the story surrounding systemd putting the work into question. Still, the work progresses and continues to move forward and many Linux Distros have chosen to adopt it as others opt to take a 'wait and see' approach.

So, far, the oldest Linux Distro Slackware has avoided the issue and the most recent version, Slackware 14.0 released last fall by its Founder +Patrick Volkerding, is doing just fine without it.

I came across an interview done by LinuxQuestions.org with Patrick and share here a passage in his interview which deals directly with the issue of systemd.  Patrick writes:

"...Concerning systemd, I do like the idea of a faster boot time (obviously), but I also like controlling the startup of the system with shell scripts that are readable, and I'm guessing that's what most Slackware users prefer too. I don't spend all day rebooting my machine, and having looked at systemd config files it seems to me a very foreign way of controlling a system to me, and attempting to control services, sockets, devices, mounts, etc., all within one daemon flies in the face of the UNIX concept of doing one thing and doing it well. To the typical end user, if this results in a faster boot then mission accomplished. With udev being phased out in favor of systemd performing those tasks we'll have to make the decision at some point between whether we want to try to maintain udev ourselves, have systemd replace just udev's functions, or if we want the whole kit and caboodle...."
Given the foregoing and given that historically Gnome was removed from Slackware, it would seem that Patrick is being careful not to tip his hand one way or another as to whether he will 'yield to pressure' and become systemd-compliant.

I speculate (Patrick's development is kept private so nobody get's access to his decision making until he says so), that Patrick's plan's for the next revision may well include software design changes that successfully keep systemd out of his implementation.

If that is the case, it would be virtuous if other Community Developers fell in lock-step and provided him assistance in such a worthy effort.

Personally, I can understand the contention surrounding systemd's invasiveness and how it violates the UNIX concept of "doing one thing and doing it well".

Specifically, having the initialization process loosely coupled to a series of run level cascading shell scripts has served Linux well for many years and maybe the concern that work being done on systemd is too ambitious insofar as bringing too many processes under control of one daemon service, systemd is warranted.  Add that the logging of activities taken by systemd are no longer human readable, but journalized in a binary format and you have a recipe for programmer revolt.

It was most recently the genesis of a decision by Fuduntu to close its doors as the volume of programming required to merge needed systemd changes was simply too large an undertaking for its meager staff to handle.

Will Slackware be the next Distro to fall in line and become systemd-compliant?  Stay tuned for developments.

-- Dietrich



Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, April 4, 2013

GNU and Linux: It's Not Just About Attribution But Also Philosophy

by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Branding is the key



An increasingly-tiring debate over the naming of the (GNU/)Linux operating system was recently rekindled. It occurred rather virally after several Web sites and longtime authors who habitually cover the subject of (GNU/)Linux had weighed in again, opening an ageing jar of worms.

Like many flamewars in the GNU and Linux world, we should accommodate these, not suppress them. With suppression -- after all -- moral advantages are lost. It is widely understood that no corporation wants to project infighting, but in the Free software world corporations are not central. Likewise, branding is not the top priority.

What the argument over the names often boils down to is philosophy, not just attribution or credit. GNU was created with software freedom in mind. Linux, in its genesis, was proprietary until it adopted the GNU GPL licence and then became mainstream. A former colleague of mine was the first to distribute GNU and Linux -- a practice which over time saw the system's name abbreviated to "Linux". The motive for this abbreviation is an interesting subject which merits its own in-depth research.

Rather than argue about what the system should be called we should pay attention to Katherine's post  and ask ourselves, what is it that should be prioritised? Freedom or popularity? These are not mutually-exclusive and describing the problem as such would be a false dichotomy. But practice suggests that those who insist on calling the system just "Linux" are happy to de-emphasise the values originally incorporated into GNU in 1983.

Richard Stallman famously said, "Freedom is having control of your own life. Power is having control over someone else's life." To a lot of people -- yours truly included -- freedom and justice are the goal, software is part of the means. For those to whom branding wars are of greater interest, the "Mac versus PC" (or Apple-branded PC versus Windows-saddled PC) is right around the corner. Or as I often put it, those who do not like Microsoft go to Apple, whereas those who do not like proprietary software turn to GNU/Linux or BSD.

Distributions of GNU/Linux bring yet more brands into the debate, not to mention all the pertinent components that belong neither to GNU nor Linux. Distributions adopt different philosophies which often reflect the views on their founder, e.g. Mark Shuttleworth in the case of Ubuntu and Patrick Volkerding in the case of Slackware Linux, Inc. The brands we use to refer to software often reveals something about our preferences, philosophy, likings and convictions.

Rather than fight over naming of systems let us reason about the innate values each of these brings. Brands are instruments of association, reputation, kinship, and/or status. We need to go deeper and explore what actual substance each of these has got. And we can choose the brands which suit us best.

- Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Enhanced by Zemanta