Interesting thread over at dyne.org

Originally Posted by hitest That makes sense. Does anyone even use 32 bit hardware in 2024? I recycled my 32 bit Acer netbook years ago. I'm glad that we still have choices in the *nix world.

I have some kind of Soekris board on the shelf I keep meaning to pull out and use again. It's equivalent to a 486, so 32 bit. But it has only 128 MiB RAM, so will have to run something lean, probably not Linux+GNU.

Plan 9? Minix? GNU Hurd is 32 bit mostly, but is it low RAM -- userland is not so difference from GNU/Linux, right? Is there an Oberon system for x86 and how hard is that to get started with? Not sure I can easily connect a display to this board, so maybe something with network ready to go would be better. I'm thinking Plan9 or the 9front spin off might be the best choice to try.

I'll bet there are all kinds of industrial and embedded 32 bit x86 machines around, many running Linux.

Originally Posted by hitest You certainly can compile stuff from source if you want; a full install of Slackware comes with a plethora of applications. Also the good people at SBo take the guess work out of compiling with their slackbuild scripts. I've used Slackware for 20 years and I don't have the need to compile a lot of stuff (I can if I wish though).

I personally have no problem with compiling from source, but the typical Debian/Devuan (or Ubuntu) users are reluctant to do so. This and the reliance on a specific package manager is really the only thing tying them to Debian or its derivatives.

It's an irony that a [Devuan] user can detest systemd that much, yet not really understand it, nor the basics of administering a Linux system - i.e not enough to just switch to a distribution that did not include systemd to begin with.

At this moment in time I can't see any compelling reasons to use Devuan. For a server OS, you're probably still better off with something well supported, irrespective of what init system it uses - for a desktop their are a ton of alternatives, even antix or MX Linux. Debian at least has an active forum, with a large community - Devuan has a quasi official forum, which is populated by many "activist" and "fanboy" types - and overseen by an administration who willfully turned a blind eye to certain members trolling and posting extreme right wing and anti-Semitic views. The administrator in fact pushes their own "philosophy" and sociopolitical agenda first and the distribution second. If you don't conform, you get sneered at, trolled and ultimately squeezed out.

Originally Posted by _blackhole_ At this moment in time I can't see any compelling reasons to use Devuan. For a server OS, you're probably still better off with something well supported, irrespective of what init system it uses - for a desktop their are a ton of alternatives, even antix or MX Linux. Debian at least has an active forum, with a large community - Devuan has a quasi official forum, which is populated by many "activist" and "fanboy" types - and overseen by an administration who willfully turned a blind eye to certain members trolling and posting extreme right wing and anti-Semitic views. The administrator in fact pushes their own "philosophy" and sociopolitical agenda first and the distribution second. If you don't conform, you get sneered at, trolled and ultimately squeezed out.

Agreed. I did give the distro a try on bare metal and it worked well enough. However Devuan is not as well supported as Debian, that is, it does not have complete software repos. I will stick with maintaining my wife's Debian desktop. I will continue to run non-systemd operating systems.

Devuan uses the Debian repositories except for a separate set of packages which have been cleaned from systemd which are in the Devuan repository. Overall, there is no difference, aside from having systemd removed.

As for support, VPS providers usually have Debian but there are often ways to put in another distro and if it supports Debian it supports Devuan.

Originally Posted by Turbocapitalist Devuan uses the Debian repositories except for a separate set of packages which have been cleaned from systemd which are in the Devuan repository. Overall, there is no difference, aside from having systemd removed. As for support, VPS providers usually have Debian but there are often ways to put in another distro and if it supports Debian it supports Devuan.

Thanks for your perspective. That's good to know. I had a jaundiced view of Devuan.

Originally Posted by Turbocapitalist As for support, VPS providers usually have Debian but there are often ways to put in another distro and if it supports Debian it supports Devuan.

This is true, but the "support" is from Debian - i.e. the project providing the security patching upstream: https://www.debian.org/security/

The derivatives, such as Devuan and the other smaller Debian based projects, have none of this infrastructure.

As with any other derivative, Devuan simply has a "fan base", who are mostly ideologically driven, who post on a forum or community and those maintaining the distribution are usually just "packagers". That's probably somewhat of a generalisation, but in a nutshell it sounds about right.

Looking at the linked dyne.org thread in the OP there is the usual hysteria, misinformation and hatred of Poettering and about systemd supposedly being a Microsoft backed project all along. Someone posted a conspiracy there about MS, IBM and Red Hat attacking and destroying the Debian derivatives through Debian itself...

systemd is nothing but an MS registry for Linux and the main purpose is to turn Linux into a MS type OS. Just why do you think that MS came to "love" Linux? And you *do* know who the author of that abortion of nature that is systemd works today?

This person clearly is misinformed as he equates systemd to the Windows registry - this is a a myth I have seen before, spread unchallenged in certain circles - usually by users of Devuan. There is another equally flawed comparison to Windows svchost, it goes on and on - in essence criticism of something they fear, with no technical data to back that up.

Their forums are littered with similar, usually worse, crap and it's precisely why the project isn't take seriously. Since it was founded, they've done a great job of driving people away - never anywhere near a serious threat to Debian (or systemd).

More likely the truth is, that none of the aforementioned fortune 500 companies actually care about a Linux distribution used by < 0.01% of Linux users. These hysterical misinformed types have only created this "assault" and conspiracy in their own minds. Debian went down the systemd root, because that's what enterprise server market wanted, and those on the corporate payroll have been steering things for well over a decade now. The enterprise market is the only Linux distro usage that actually registers on the scale. The rest of Linux is Android and embedded use. Desktop hobbyists are tiny. Linux got too big, too popular and has evolved accordingly. Some of that evolution is good, some is bad. The problem with corporate backed software, is that it's developed from a business perspective - ultimately to make money. For Red Hat, a system which is much more black box and needs accreditation to administer by their "certified professionals" and is dependent on their paid support contracts is simply good business.

It is an understatement to say that diatribe in the preceding post is inaccurate. Re-read (or just plain read) the Devuan list archives or the web forum there. systemd has only ever had the two fallacies of argumentum ad hominem and argumentum ad novitatem to advance its position, like illustrated to a tee in the preceding post, nothing more.

Devuan remains about choice. That freedom of choice is not limited to init systems but does start with the init system literally and figuratively. Choice ensures that goods and services can be provided by interchangeable vendors and suppliers. The interchangeability ensures a commodity market, which would also be the ability of one system, service, or product to work interchangeably with another.

To paraphrase the chairman of Nokia back when it was at the top of its game, commodity markets are recognized as the foundation for success by enabling interoperability of technologies thus encouraging innovation and healthy competition which in turn increases consumer choice and opens entirely new markets. In that way, open standards and platforms create a foundation for success and growth.

In contrast, lack of choice and lock-in, like demonstrated in the menagerie of service substitutes provided by systemd, are a step away from all of that and towards the decommoditization of Linux. The usrmerge fiasco is just another way to hurt Debian and move it further away from commodity Linux. That brings it back to post #1, at the start of the thread:

Originally Posted by luvr See [DNG] There seems to be some strong disagreement in Debian regarding usrmerge. ...

As Bdale Garbee apparently put it last year, usrmerge causes great pain with no discernible benefit to Debian so far. Some of that pain, as I elaborate above, is about weakening a beneficial, commodity market. Soon, the various distros will neither interoperate nor will the skill sets needed to work with them be portable, say to Slackware. That portability of skills is probably the most relevant here and you already see a lack of it with the 'cloud' (dis-)services.

Originally Posted by Turbocapitalist Devuan remains about choice. That freedom of choice is not limited to init systems but does start with the init system literally and figuratively. Choice ensures that goods and services can be provided by interchangeable vendors and suppliers. The interchangeability ensures a commodity market, which would also be the ability of one system, service, or product to work interchangeably with another. ... In contrast, lack of choice and lock-in, like demonstrated in the menagerie of service substitutes provided by systemd, are a step away from all of that and towards the decommoditization of Linux.

I am not an anti-systemd fanatic. I've used systemd distros (Arch briefly and Debian for longer) and I once built and actively used a systemd LFS. I actually like the speed with which systemd boots and the simple config file syntax, and I'm prepared to believe what the server admins say about its usefulness in that environment. But I have become increasingly unhappy about the way that systemd, which claims to be just another init system, puts out tentacles into the OS itself. More and more application packages now need systemd in order to function, unless you jump through hoops when building them.

I remember a discussion on this forum a few years ago on whether the whole concept of free software needed updating. I suggested an additional freedom: the freedom to mix and match, to use whatever software you like with whatever software you like. After all, it's your system. But you can't do that if user applications like the printer daemon require a specific init system.

Turbocapitalist, I can assure you that I have read the web forum (many times, seen all the drama, the bans, the philosophical rants, the favouritism shown towards mindless fans, and extreme prejudice to all others) - and the mailing lists. You seem to miss the point of my "diatribe" entirely and dismiss it in a single sentence.

Despite your advocacy above (and I have to say I appreciate many of your posts and find we agree on far more than we disagree, so hope there's no hard feelings), I feel you're trying to justify your investment in a project which lost it's way years ago and is a losing battle. The project has attracted some toxic people and kept those people onboard, both because it needs any support it can get and due to it's philosophy.

Posting your criticism of systemd and your overview of the of decommpdisation, with references to the Halloween docs (be aware that ESR himself was treated with disdain on their forum and promptly left, never to return (the project leader of antix also voted with his feet)), much of which I completely agree with, doesn't change a thing with regards to the direction, influences within, funding and end game of Debian project and the state/plight of Devuan, nor does it challenge my diatribe in any way. As I see it 1) Devuan is on borrowed time, as it depends on the "hostile upstream" of the Debian project - a project which has undergone a slow but sure transformation away from its original values. 2) Devuan will eventually have to consider a new base, or it will simply be abandoned due to lack of manpower, time and resources for the monumental amount of work required. 3) Devuan and it's associated community resources, will need to reconsider the facilitating of "toxic" people (giving a platform to "conspiracy nuts", those with political, religious and/or philosophical agendas, etc), if it wants to be taken seriously. At present, I cannot take Devuan seriously, and if I want an OS without systemd I will choose something else. I have a feeling I'm not alone in that.

Originally Posted by _blackhole_ Turbocapitalist, I can assure you that I have read the web forum (many times, seen all the drama, the bans, the philosophical rants, the favouritism shown towards mindless fans, and extreme prejudice to all others) - and the mailing lists. You seem to miss the point of my "diatribe" entirely and dismiss it in a single sentence. Despite your advocacy above (and I have to say I appreciate many of your posts and find we agree on far more than we disagree, so hope there's no hard feelings), I feel you're trying to justify your investment in a project which lost it's way years ago and is a losing battle. The project has attracted some toxic people and kept those people onboard, both because it needs any support it can get and due to it's philosophy. Posting your criticism of systemd and your overview of the of decommpdisation, with references to the Halloween docs (be aware that ESR himself was treated with disdain on their forum and promptly left, never to return (the project leader of antix also voted with his feet)), much of which I completely agree with, doesn't change a thing with regards to the direction, influences within, funding and end game of Debian project and the state/plight of Devuan, nor does it challenge my diatribe in any way. As I see it 1) Devuan is on borrowed time, as it depends on the "hostile upstream" of the Debian project - a project which has undergone a slow but sure transformation away from its original values. 2) Devuan will eventually have to consider a new base, or it will simply be abandoned due to lack of manpower, time and resources for the monumental amount of work required. 3) Devuan and it's associated community resources, will need to reconsider the facilitating of "toxic" people (giving a platform to "conspiracy nuts", those with political, religious and/or philosophical agendas, etc), if it wants to be taken seriously. At present, I cannot take Devuan seriously, and if I want an OS without systemd I will choose something else. I have a feeling I'm not alone in that.

A FreeBSD user shows up on a Slackware forum to complain about a Devuan user who has strong opinions about a Microsoft employee who created a new Linux init system after complaining about how POSIX sucks and we should be more like Windows.

Wake me up when September ends.

Originally Posted by Pithium A FreeBSD user shows up on a Slackware forum to complain about a Devuan user who has strong opinions about a Microsoft employee who created a new Linux init system after complaining about how POSIX sucks and we should be more like Windows.

Hello there! I am not the thread starter. The thread probably needs to be moved to general?

(As a "FreeBSD user", I am somehow not entitled to post here [in the Slackware sub forum]!?)

Originally Posted by _blackhole_ (As a "FreeBSD user", I am somehow not entitled to post here [in the Slackware sub forum]!?)

You're always welcome solving my problems or making constructive comments on any LQ forum imho.

Originally Posted by _blackhole_ Hello there! I am not the thread starter. The thread probably needs to be moved to general? (As a "FreeBSD user", I am somehow not entitled to post here [in the Slackware sub forum]!?)

You completely missed my point. Not sure if that's because you only read the first 9 words of my post or something else entirely, but ultimately I don't care that much why you failed to understand the meaning of a sarcastic joke.

I'm not going to give you a hard time for not getting the Eternal September reference. That joke is older than I am but still very relevant to today's internet. Before you go and start putting words in other peoples' mouths consider taking some time to read about the history of internet etiquette and some of the mistakes made by the trolls of old.


As for your concerns about being welcome here.. it's not my forum. Whether or not you are "entitled" depends entirely on the house rules set by the owners of the server (read: not me). But again, that's totally tangential to my original point and I'm a bit annoyed that it even needs to be stated. Hopefully things will settle down by the time October starts and we can focus on more interesting discussions.

Why is it that any thread which has to do directly or indirectly with systemd always ends in acrimony?

@Pithium: Was I rude to you? I read and understood your post and my reply was rather tongue in cheek. Lost in translation maybe?