LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   Slackware (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/)
-   -   What If .........Slack needs Systemd (Slackbuilds) (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/what-if-slack-needs-systemd-slackbuilds-4175484413/)

Okie 11-14-2013 02:07 PM

as an old slacker i agree with those that dont want systemd, you cant just build a drop-in replacement of the init system, its like the launch codes on an ICBM multi-warhead nuclear missile = not something to be meddling with if you want it to all work properly

tuxbg 11-14-2013 02:17 PM

I just want to test it.Why so much hate ?

Darth Vader 11-14-2013 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alien Bob (Post 5064433)
As far as I know, SystemD does not support /usr being a separate filesystem unless you yourself ensure that it gets mounted before SystemD starts (i.e. you need to mount it in the initrd). See http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software...usr-is-broken/ for a piece of arrogance barfed up by our favourite Slackware destroyer.

Eric

As far as I know, the separate /usr issue exists right now, even with the glorious and so orthodox udev. This is the price payed to have a super-cool auto-configuration, but having apps or libraries as dependencies in /usr...

That's why most of us we need a properly initrd to boot our super nice auto-configured (and so encrypted?) operating system.

To be honest, even I believe too that the page author is a rare piece of arrogance, still I do not see nothing wrong in that page...

bartgymnast 11-14-2013 02:21 PM

tuxbg,

the error after using your login name is because of the file /etc/login.defs
you will need the one supplied with the package.

most likely it is still /etc/login.defs.new

I updated the build script to make sure it is not .new, people can change the options later as needed.

Stuferus 11-14-2013 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tuxbg (Post 5064477)
I just want to test it.Why so much hate ?

i think that would work better with an other linux than slackware at the moment.. :)

tuxbg 11-14-2013 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuferus (Post 5064484)
i think that would work better with an other linux than slackware at the moment.. :)

You are funny guy :)

tuxbg 11-14-2013 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bartgymnast (Post 5064481)
tuxbg,

the error after using your login name is because of the file /etc/login.defs
you will need the one supplied with the package.

most likely it is still /etc/login.defs.new

I updated the build script to make sure it is not .new, people can change the options later as needed.

Yes it was my mistake.I override /etc/login.defs and now all things works

Darth Vader 11-14-2013 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tuxbg (Post 5064495)
Yes it was my mistake.I override /etc/login.defs and now all things works

Then, you do not have now any "separate /usr" problems?

tuxbg 11-14-2013 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth Vader (Post 5064500)
Then, you do not have now any "separate /usr" problems?

No i dont have "any" login problems

bartgymnast 11-14-2013 02:50 PM

good to hear tuxbg,

the next package on my list to do this weekend is util-linux.
this package is linked against libudev.so.0, but systemd/udev since v187 (if not mistaken) is using libudev.so.1

As you see in the systemd.slackbuild it uses currently the ugly hack of linking libudev.so.0 to libudev.so.1
That should at the end not be needed anymore.

If you came across things that might seem to be a problem, do not hesitate to write it here. or send to my mail

Darth Vader 11-14-2013 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tuxbg (Post 5064501)
No i dont have "any" login problems

Long story short, the SystemD works in your system as expected and you consider that, as replacement (now!) of the orthodox BSD-like init of Slackware, it works equal or even better?

jprzybylski 11-14-2013 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alien Bob (Post 5064433)
As far as I know, SystemD does not support /usr being a separate filesystem unless you yourself ensure that it gets mounted before SystemD starts (i.e. you need to mount it in the initrd). See http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software...usr-is-broken/ for a piece of arrogance barfed up by our favourite Slackware destroyer.

Now, see, most days I don't mind systemd too much, but then they have things like this:

Quote:

Here's a short, very in-comprehensive list of software we are aware of that currently are not able to provide the full set of functionality when /usr is split off and not pre-mounted at boot: udev-pci-db/udev-usb-db and all rules depending on this (using the PCI/USB database in /usr/share), PulseAudio, NetworkManager, ModemManager, udisks, libatasmart, usb_modeswitch, gnome-color-manager, usbmuxd, ALSA, D-Bus, CUPS, Plymouth, LVM, hplip, multipath, Argyll, VMWare, the locale logic of most programs and a lot of other stuff.
And I think - why not just mount the stuff on fstab first? And who wants to run this stuff before filesystems come up? hplip? Really? Is it a problem that their core init program is linked to all this stuff, and this stuff is on /usr? How about not making the init linked to all this and, after processing fstab, start the bigger part of systemd? Seems easier than changing a 40-something-year-old concept.

But then I read this, and I get it. The word 'Solaris' appears 12 times. Compatibility to other Unixes/Linuxes translates to Solaris. Upstream is Solaris. Despite our closer cousins in BSD, they don't get mentioned once. It's an enterprise move so that Oracle doesn't need to try so hard to port our software.

In the end, if the technical reasons don't make sense, it's because they're made after the fact - it's really about the politics.

But now I'm being mean. I still want to see good stuff come out of these SlackBuilds!

EDIT: Heh, we were still on page 2 when I started that... whoops...

tuxbg 11-14-2013 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth Vader (Post 5064504)
Long story short, the SystemD works in your system as expected and you consider that, as replacement (now!) of the orthodox BSD-like init of Slackware, it works equal or even better?

I just wont to test it.What's the problem?Why everybody judge me?

bartgymnast 11-14-2013 03:00 PM

tux, darth-vader wanted to have your opinion.

he wants to know if it works better, the same or worse than before

Darth Vader 11-14-2013 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tuxbg (Post 5064507)
I just wont to test it.What's the problem?Why everybody judge me?

I do not judge you, my friend! I just ask you if SystemD works fine as replacement of Slackware BSD-Init, which is really it, in our case... ;)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:40 PM.