|
Top-level
@ariadne And even if you need an api libseatd has shown how to do it right: allow multiple backends. If libudev would work ok when udev isn't running it could be considered independent. 8 comments
 @ariadne @sertonix @dalias @leftpaddotpy @dysfun As someone that is one the server side, the total lack of service manager that seems to have understood the problems we deal with is... fascinating. Systemd is definitely the easiest to work with and the one with the most hooks we need. It does have sooooo many issues, both in UX and in implementation (and code quality) but at least it... works and allows us to do the job @ariadne @sertonix @dalias @leftpaddotpy @dysfun Would I love something better and have ideas for it? Sure. Do any of us have the time and expertise and money to build something better? Nope. Same reason we are stuck with autotools and make....  @Di4na @ariadne meson, cmake, and others exist and make my life as a packager and developer much less bad. well, cmake is about on par for packaging suffering as make. but still, they're way nicer to write and use. on the other hand, bazel exists and has caused hours of pain every time I've touched it. but so is the case for googleware of any kind. @ariadne Actively developing better designed software and push the use of it is. And most importantly explain how to use it! The Alpine Wiki tends to include "use this systemd component and it just works(TM)" instead of "you have a choice. One might not work but you can help to improve it here". |
Gregory's Server
@sertonix @dalias @leftpaddotpy @dysfun yes, we all agree that seatd is better.
that was never the point. i have never said systemd is architecturally correct.
i just ponder if this is the issue that we need to focus on, considering we have been trying to replace openrc for years and have not made any tangible progress on doing so.
the graphical environments have, in large part, chosen to follow the systemd APIs.
the implementations of those APIs we provide are largely based on extricated code from old versions of systemd which are not kept up to date with the newer APIs requested by the graphical environments.
therefore, given that we are sinking resources into keeping these stub implementations going, and the stub implementations are deficient, which requires further hacking around at the graphical environment level to keep things working, one must ponder whether it is worth the resource cost to keep openrc (itself barely maintained) and the various forms of extricated systemd code (ranging from not maintained to barely maintained) alive.
how does alpine benefit from this effort, which takes a lot of effort and results in a suboptimal user experience in many cases?
is the benefit that we can say “we don’t use systemd, we’re proud of that”? and if so, how does that talking point make alpine better? because we don’t use systemd? a silly and circular argument, i think.
it is like the people who are upset that X is losing maintainer interest while Wayland is gaining maintainer interest. but they aren’t interested in stepping up and doing the work to keep X as a viable alternative.
the anti-systemd crowd offers the same flavor of argument: here is a bunch of random projects stitched together, and while it works for the proposer, it is more like a 60% solution rather than the 100% solution the proposer sells it as.
oh, you can just avoid systemd with these little tricks! nevermind that when you do that, half the control panel settings in Plasma and GNOME don’t work, because the systemd APIs they call via dbus are just stubbed out.
an interesting observation in this thread is that nobody has advocated to keep openrc. but i have heard about all sorts of projects included in the systemd monorepo that we would never actually use, like systemd-boot or resolved.
interesting that.
@sertonix @dalias @leftpaddotpy @dysfun yes, we all agree that seatd is better.
that was never the point. i have never said systemd is architecturally correct.
i just ponder if this is the issue that we need to focus on, considering we have been trying to replace openrc for years and have not made any tangible progress on doing so.