OT: GNOME a Linux-only project ? systemd a dependency of GNOME 3 ?

[JB]

JB <jb.1234abcd <at> gmail.com> writes:

> ...

Proposals:
==========
- systemd as an external dependency for GNOME 3 (GNOME-Shell)
  systemd has Linux as a dependency and won't be ported to other OSs (which
  would be a very difficult undertaking anyway due to its Linux-specific
  nature). This would effectively make GNOME a Linux-specific desktop
  environment. 
  systemd itself has very minimal external dependencies - you need Linux,
  udev, D-Bus, and that's it (there are a couple of additional optional
  deps however).

- GNOME to become Linux-only
  As a result of systemd dependence: GNOME-Shell requires systemd which
  requires Linux.
  But, GNOME could elect to become Linux-only without systemd-dependence as
  well ?
  So, why GNOME/systemd formal dependence ? Who needs it ?
  
As a result of it:
==================
- GNOME would drop support for other OSs such as Solaris and the BSDs

- Debian also has versions using the FreeBSD or HURD kernel, and on these
  versions, GNOME would no longer be able to run.

Comments (summary, extracts):
=============================
- GNOME devs are split over it; dropping support for long-term partners
  (Oracle/Sun) and other OSs is an issue

- the meaning of it ?
  http://www.osnews.com/comments/24762
  by darknexus on Thu 19th May 2011 21:16 UTC in reply to "Please correct if
  wrong..."
  "Doesn't this mean that in order to run Gnome, one must use systemd?
  What if people want to use sysvinit, initng, upstart, runit, or eINIT...?"
  I doubt most users care which init system they're running. The real question
  is what if most distros don't want to switch to using systemd, as it provides
  no real benefits over some of the other init systems out there and would
  require all packages' init scripts to be rewritten?
  GNOME should go linux-only, imho, but it should not depend on systemd. Not
  everyone wants to reinvent the wheel like Poettering seems to enjoy doing.
  If he wants to integrate systemd support into GNOME, great. If the Ubuntu
  devs wish to integrate upstart support into GNOME, that's awesome. If Debian
  wants to integrate sysvinit support, more power to them. Forcing a hard
  dependency of systemd is probably one of the worst ideas I've heard... but,
  then again, most of GNOME 3 seems to be one huge bad idea. To those who
  think forcing systemd on everyone is a good idea, remember what happened
  when GNOME started depending on Pulseaudio and just how well that's turned
  out?

  jessesmith Member since: 2010-03-11
  I think the above comment has it pretty much spot on. This isn't just
  saying, "Screw other operating systems", it's also saying, "Screw Linux
  distributions that don't use systemd." That could be a problem for
  Debian/Ubuntu/Slackware (I think) and other distros that use other init
  systems. 

  Soulbender Member since:  2005-08-18
  Oh come on, it's all acceptable sacrifices in order to increase RedHat's
  market share.
  ...What?

- Common Standards ?
  http://www.osnews.com/comments/24762
  by Brendan on Thu 19th May 2011 21:43 UTC

  There's too many different "Unix-like" OSs and not enough common standards
  between them; which makes it hard for GUI projects to support all
  "Unix-like" OSs properly.
  There's too many different GUIs and not enough common standards between
  them; which makes it hard for "Unix-like" OSs to support all GUI projects
  properly.
  [sarcasm]
  Obviously, GUI projects should abandon support for different OSs; and OSs
  should abandon support for different GUI projects. Any suggestion that
  common standards could've prevented both these issues would just be silly.
  [/sarcasm]

- so what is the role of freedesktop.org and its standards ?
  http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/
  ... projects working on interoperability and shared technology for X Window
  System desktops.
  ... building a base platform for desktop software on Linux and UNIX.

- I worry about Linux ecosystem being pulled away from UNIX-like heritage:
  - systemd is perceived as non UNIX-like, very alien
  - FreeBSD stays true to its heritage
    http://wiki.freebsd.org/BSDInstall
    An example of a UNIX philosophy at work - scriptable, modular, extendable.

- GNOME 3 dropping its support for classic desktop "look at feel" (as in
  GNOME 2) already alienated many tech users, not to mention business users
  who are even more conservative - there is a good chance there will be
  a considerable migration to other DEs 

- GNOME dev missteps
  http://www.osnews.com/comments/24762
  by lewkor on Thu 19th May 2011 21:34 UTC in reply to "Sad but inevitable"
  "Well, its the direction GNOME has been going anyway!!! Let them!!!
  You hit the nail on the head when you said that they have been taking GNOME
  in the same direction as Windows. If a project insists on implementing
  the very worst methodologies in the history of computing then maybe that
  project does not deserve to exist!!!
  Here are some examples of abandoning traditional UNIX/Linux methods in
  favour of more Windowsy methods.
  They use gconf rather than text formats. What's wrong with that you ask?
  When the variables in gconf duplicate those values in OS files then it is
  a problem. Didn't you guys pay attention in your first week of DB theory
  that whenever values are duplicated that they will always get out of sync.
  Where I ran into this was when I added users as root using useradd rather
  than the GNOME utilities. The result was that gdm didn't know about the new
  users and the new users could't login to gdm.
  What is the most retarded thing about Windows? The friggin registry!!! Just
  go back to windows!!! Leave my UNIX/Linux alone you morons!!!
  Another thing about the GNOME community is the way they can't friggin wait
  to get MS tech into Linux and thereby fall into the trap that is being set
  by MS. I'm of course referring to Mono and C#. Again, if you friggin want
  windows you know where to go!
  I'm finished my rant now!!!
  After that rant I can't see it happening anyway. If it isn't cross platform
  then the BSD guys will adopt KDE (Yeah!!!). Can you see Oracle putting KDE
  on Solaris and GNOME on Oracle Linux? Wouldn't they want a unified desktop
  for both systems? Combined with the abortion that GNOME 3 is turning out to
  be they would either stick with version 2 or fork the project. Hopefully
  that would kill it - the sooner the better!"

  by twitterfire on Fri 20th May 2011 20:16 UTC in reply to "RE: Sad but
  inevitable" 
  "You bark in vain. The reason Gnome devs borrowed strongly from MS is
  because they have seen more value in things borrowed than in "traditional
  UNIX/Linux methods". If you think Windows registry is lame, than you must
  acknowledge than keeping settings in flat text files spread all over
  the file system is medieval and dumb.
  And yes, C# is better for general use than Python and Bash scripting will
  ever be. 

- is it really so that systemd will be the de facto replacement for the classic
  SysV-Init system and service management system ? It will be introduced in
  an experimental distro Fedora 15 first time, and tested, so all is still
  open.
  Will we not see improvements from others like Upstart, or even entirely new
  offerings ?
  See also:
    * initng
    * launchd
    * Service Management Facility
    * eINIT
    * GoboLinux#Boot system
    * systemd
    * runit
    * daemontools
  So, why GNOME's dependence on systemd ? Who needs it ? 

- what about other DEs like KDE, Xfce, LXDE ? Are they supposed to be
  dependent on systemd as well ?

- remember that GNOME is not only a DE, but also a platform for application
  devs. Is Linux-only GNOME going to be better off in that group ?

- time to add Xfce and LXDE to official QA release criteria in Fedora
  Note: I am worried about these DEs having GNOME packages dependencies.

- time to switch away from GNOME to other DEs, in particular if you take care
  of a mixed OS environment (Linux, Solaris, BSDs) ?
  But, apparently it is not GNOME only problem, ...
  "The point is, it pulls in so much crap from Linux-land that it might as
  well be Linux only. It might be "cross-platform" now, but only because other
  people took the time to port it and it's dependencies. It's not like
  the GNOME team designed it to work across multiple platforms.
  For proof of it's Linuxness, look at what happened when Xfce moved from
  Thunar VFS to the GVFS. Xfce lost BSD support, and now people are trying to
  port all the crap that GVFS needs to work. That's not cross-platform. If it
  was cross-platform, Xfce 4.8 would run on the BSDs out of the box, and
  people wouldn't have to waste time porting redundant junk. 

  "Really quite a dilemma for me, even without this latest discussion. I've
  been using Linux since 1994. Currently, I don't like Gnome 3 or Unity. My
  experience with KDE 4 has been bad, even just a month ago with Fedora.
  Basically, it looks like I'm going have to try out some of the other DE's.
  ... 
  It really seems like users are taking a beating these days. First they
  decide we don't need menus anymore. Then, the conventional taskbar/start
  menu is no good. It really seems like change for change's sake. 

- the finale
  "Dude, ... Let gnome guys do whatever they want and stop trolling please".

Methinks ... geeks have too many itches ... and aversion to thinking ...
All the best to you ... from UNIX generation :-)

JB

Genesis - Land of Confusion
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zU9lv_WqK6k