Following the thread about the theme of the initialization systems in Debian, in whichl in a previous post our fellow Linux Post Install shared here on the blog (you can check the article at the following link). Now in more recent news, a few days ago a call was made to Debian developers to participate in the vote on the diversity of initialization systems in Debian, whether these should be admitted again or not.
You have to remember that in 2014 there was a vote después from which Debian adopted systemd, in which at the time it was the subject of an extensive debate. In February 2014, the technical committee in charge of Debian had decided that for the next major version of the operating system, systemd would be used as the default boot system.
However, systemd was rejected by some members from the open source community, who believed that the project went against the philosophy of Unix and that its developers behaved anti-Unix, since systemd is incompatible with all non-Linux systems.
Administrators who used Debian in October 2014 they launched a series of threats among which was leaving the project if systemd was to be used by default.
A few weeks later, four prominent members of the Debian community resigned. or reduced their participation. Colin Watson and Russ Allberry, two members of the Debian Project Technical Committee, announced their resignation on November 8 and 16, 2014, respectively.
After all these pressures, the technical committee started another vote compared to systemd before the features to be offered in "Jessie" were frozen.
During that time several options were proposed (in total five) to resolve the conflict. Ian Jackson, a member of the technical committee, proposed the coupling of boot systems, arguing that Debian packages, in general, do not need a specific boot system, and that it was necessary to adopt a technical directive to force it, except in individual cases justified.
Another developer suggested that support for other boot systems is recommended, but not required.
Finally the use of systemd was kept as originally planned. Voting results were published in November 2014.
The initialization systems in Debian could return
Now five years later, Debian has launched a new vote to judge interest in "init system diversity" and how much or not Debian developers care about systemd support alternatives.
The call to vote was recently announced on the mailing list and the vote ends on December 27. Soon after, we should know what the Debian development community has decided for the future role of systemless distribution support.
Due to different opinions from Debian developers on handling non-system errors in 2019 and interest / commitment to supporting system alternatives as part of the Debian package and various related sticking points, they are looking to adopt a new one. general resolution on weighting the diversity of the init system.
After public comments, The eight voting options for Debian developers include:
- Focus on systemd
- Systemd but we support exploring alternatives.
- Support for multiple boot systems is important.
- Supports non-system systems, without blocking progress.
- Supports portability, without blocking progress.
- Support for multiple boot systems is required.
- Support for portability and multiple implementations.
- Continue the discussion.
Of the options presented Debian developers will be able to choose more than one if they wish.
If you want to know more about Regarding the news, you can check the Debian mailing lists at the following link. In addition to that in more detail on the matter about the options that Debian developers have for voting.
Finally, the results could be announced one day after the end of the voting, that is, on December 28.
systemd sucks !!
Although it may not seem like it, I think there is a growing awareness of how harmful systemd is and there are more distros that do not use it or offer multiple initiates.
Personally, I'm delighted with Artix (it's Arch but without sysmted) and OpenRC as init, although it also offers Runit and now s6. I can only say that it is wonderful. I have triple boot on my laptop and I still have (at the moment because I am lazy) the partition with Arch and although it seems that there are no differences, there are. What I have noticed is that Artix starts faster when you have parallelization activated than Arch until the ssdm login screen (I use plasma) but it is that from the moment you enter the password until the Arch desktop appears it takes much longer than Artix so the boot speed which was the advantage some mentioned of systemd was ruined. The only thing Arch does faster than Artix is shutdown and not always. If there is one of those famous countdowns that come when you feel like it, it is much slower. What I have gained with Artix is above all stability, it does not make those strange locks (more than locks is that it becomes a turtle for seconds), nor strange behaviors from time to time or messages on shutdown that who knows what they mean which It is one more sample (of multiple examples) of the programming so bad and terrible that it has since even in Debian with how stable it is, it happens (I also have a pc with Debian), we are not a problem of the distro or the computer anymore It happens exactly the same on one computer as on another (one is 32 bits, the other 64, one is optimus and the other is not), the only thing they have in common is systemd. Although Artix is a rolling machine it is as stable (using the lts kernel) as it used to be before Jessie's arrival. I have had 0 problems although yes, I have had to read a little about OpenRC to know a little about the commands but no more than when I read it to learn how to handle systemd.
Then there is also the Devuan issue, which from my point of view is a slap in the face of Debian since there are starting to be some other derivatives of Debian that have changed the base for Devuan.
The number one distro in the distrowatch ranking (MX Linux) does not use systemd as init (although it does use shim to make it compatible).
Anyway, there are already several examples of very competent distros that go beyond systemd and work much better in my opinion.
Ideally, Debian should behave like Devuan and let you choose. If Ubuntu changes its init after that, all its derivatives would do so too and simply, even if by inertia, systemd would go to the toilet, which is the place where it should never have come from since in practice, only a few distros would use it. Basically the world of Red Hat, Suse, Arch and little else since most of the Linux universe derives directly or indirectly from Debian.
PS.- I'm sorry to have extended myself so much, but I have become a bit fired up with the subject.
more information: https://vegnuli.wordpress.com/2019/11/24/diversidad-de-los-sistemas-de-inicio-en-peligro-en-debian-afecta-a-otras-distros/#more-285 and updated in http://vegnuli.blogspot.com/2019/11/diversidad-de-los-sistemas-de-inicio-en.html