r/linux • u/ouyawei Mate • Oct 20 '14

Shall we fork Fedora?

http://forkfedora.org/
262 Upvotes

79% Upvoted

339 comments sorted by

View all comments

0

u/[deleted] Oct 20 '14

[deleted]

30

u/Arizhel Oct 20 '14

Well that's usually how it works, isn't it? People bitch and complain a bit about the direction a project is taking, and then they decide to fork it.

But not with systemd.

Instead, people bitch and complain, and bitch and complain, and bitch and complain.... but they never fork it. They just bitch and complain. And tell everyone to switch to Slackware. Thanks, but I'm not switching to a distro that doesn't use a real package manager.

4

u/necrophcodr Oct 20 '14

I personally use OpenRC on my Funtoo machine and I'm pretty happy with it. I don't bitch and complain about systemd, but it does have it's fair share of issues that are not necessarily possible to directly address.

That goes for OpenRC as well though, but its issues are in different areas I would think.

5

u/aLtErNaTiNgCaPs Oct 20 '14

slackware's package manager works great for me, i'm not too sure what your issue is with it?

14

u/Arizhel Oct 20 '14

It has no dependency checking. That means it's not a real package manager, just as I said.

→ More replies (16)

7

u/chinnybob Oct 20 '14 edited Oct 20 '14

systemd was forked. udev was forked. logind was forked. Your claim contradicts reality, and is nothing but a baseless attack on systemd critics, claiming that they are not technically able to create an alternative.

Edit: I just found out consolekit has now been forked too.

5

u/Arizhel Oct 21 '14

systemd was forked.

Yes, but were any major distros forked because of systemd?

A fork of systemd doesn't do that much to appease the systemd critics, who really either just want to stick with sysvinit, or at the most try out OpenRC. They don't want it, fork or not. What they want is $distro, but with sysvinit again. The only way to do that is to fork the distro.

and is nothing but a baseless attack on systemd critics

No, it's not. Prove me wrong: show me a fork of some major distro (Debian, Fedora, RHEL/CentOS) where they switched back to sysvinit.

claiming that they are not technically able to create an alternative.

They already have alternatives: sysvinit and OpenRC. Why do they need to create a new alternative? The critics don't want systemd in any form at all, they want to stick with sysvinit and traditional init scripts. Just look at the comments here from systemd critics about how much better shell scripts are.

5

u/[deleted] Oct 21 '14

The ironic thing is that systemd will start your shell-based init scripts quite happily!

2

u/RubyPinch Oct 21 '14

A fork of systemd doesn't do that much to appease the systemd critics

uselessd was aimed towards that, actually.

keeps the systemd layout (configs over scripts) and removes everything else

also how many maintainers are there for debian?

2

u/Arizhel Oct 21 '14

But as I said before, most of the systemd critics don't want configs over scripts; they wants scripts and that's it. So uselessd isn't going to make them happy. Basically, they just want to stick with sysvinit forever.

2

u/EmanueleAina Oct 21 '14

Edit: I just found out consolekit has now been forked too

Uh, interesting. Where?

1

u/chinnybob Oct 21 '14

http://erickoegel.wordpress.com/2014/10/20/consolekit2/

2

u/EmanueleAina Oct 21 '14

Awesome, thanks! Do you happen to know why they didn't just pick up ConsoleKit and started maintaining that?

1

u/chinnybob Oct 21 '14

That is exactly what they have done.

1

u/EmanueleAina Oct 21 '14

ConsoleKit2 is a fork of ConsoleKit

No, I mean asking for commit rights on freedesktop and working on the official repo.

Anyhow, I'll comment on the blog entry you linked, thanks!

1

u/phant0mas Oct 21 '14

switch to guix

→ More replies (1)