Random guys thoughts on the future of AntiX/MX gnu/Linux.

[Artim]

With just a moment's reflection you might realize that many people use and love antiX because it doesn't use systemd.

It doesn't have systemd at all. MX has it but doesn't use it unless the user chooses it. It's the perfect sensible solution for users to whom it's important. Regardless if you like it, despise it, or are neutral about it, letting the user decide is a fantastic solution.

[junoluna]

i have yet to read anything in layman's terms what difference the init system makes... i guess that means i don't need to care about it too much

whatever the devs here choose to do is good with me .... as a typical, rather clueless end user, i can't tell the difference having booted MX with systemd a few times... was expecting something explosive to happen :)

[freemedia2018]

MX has it but doesn't use it unless the user chooses it. It's the perfect sensible solution for users to whom it's important. Regardless if you like it, despise it, or are neutral about it, letting the user decide is a fantastic solution.

i think its impressive that mx offers the choice-- most anti-systemd distros seem to have enough of a challenge just maintaining freedom From systemd, while mx goes as far as supporting both. its just weird that debian thinks it cant but mx can.

being no fan of systemd or the attitude of its paid developers, the only problems i can think of with adding the mx-like choice to antix are:

1. potentially making antix a less "svelte" distro. it boots stupidly fast and seems trivial to fit onto a cd (whatever size it begins as.)

2. potentially leading to a (seemingly unlikely) point in the distant future where they decide to scrap options in favour of systemd, as debian has (i did say unlikely.) technically this could happen regardless, it just might give the small odds a tiny boost.

3. making it more difficult to maintain antix. when debian finds it so difficult to maintain choice, it seems miraculous that mx or antix can do it. im sure this is related to the number of packages debian maintains. even then...

at any rate, this is not a request to add mx-like choice to antix. i honestly assumed that (along with xfce) is what mx was for.

[jeffreyC]

If systemd was just an init system it would not face the opposition that it does.

What it is intended to be is the entire layer between the kernel and the applications.
GNU/systemd/Linux

[anixer]

Too many responses to name each person so just going to be in general here and babble. Nopers, I like AntiX, well liked anyway, for me the decision to carry on with SysV is a definite downside element in my view of it. Sheesh at least do SysV + Openrc, something to make it at least different. Why do I feel such, mentioned some of those reasons throughout this thread already. Technical ... though all well documented and covered plenty of places online. I personally have no interest in any out-of-box gnu/Linux distribution. Don't have an interest in using any of them for any period of time outside of playing with and looking whichever of them over occasionally.

I create my own config of Debian gnu/nix, as I've done for many years. Super light, super stable/fast, all the things I want to use and tweaked to hades and gone. Given the knowledge, experience and skillset, yep ya know what they say, want something done right (setup to x-persons own tastes and preferences)... do it yourself. Don't need anyone else to config Debian for me. Even if what those people put out is kickbutt and liked/loved by those among it's community=userbase. Reason for thread was exactly what's stated in the title. A random nixers outlooks on things which may have positive or negative impact on a given nix distro.

Made it plain what type of impact I think holding onto SysV is going to have for effected distro's. Though hey, that's another of the awesome things about open source and what I like to think of as the Nixsphere (all the different gnu/Nix distributions running around in the wild.) They stand and fall on the decisions they(the devs/maintainers) make, of course including how they adapt to decisions made far, far, FAR above them "upstream". They grow or shrink, stay popular, lose popularity, grow or dwindle on their merits. It's a natural selection type thing among gnu/Linux operating systems.

PS, which hey the good press and popularity MX is enjoying is a clear reflection of the people behind it making good decisions, it's only natural. :)

[anixer]

One more observation, the ignorant only do one thing and well blahblah nonsense. Things have radically changed in tech, how it's used, what it's used on. Smart phones, smart cars, friggin blenders powered by gnu/Linux sitting on someone counter tops. Someone has to actually somewhat understand why systemd just doesn't stop at xyz-role, as only an init. When someone (highly friggin skilled) went to replace something like the init(SysV) in gnu/Linux, they also had to replace other outdated components which are setup/designed, also patchworked and bandaided to work with that outdated/inferior init. It'd be like a mechanic going to switch out the engine on a vehicle but the transmission and a bunch of other components aren't designed for it or are also getting ready to blowout themselves anyway.

Sure ... errr, fixed your engine, your transmission is slipping and about to blowout and needs to be replaced too or hell I had to duct-tape, had to grind and tack weld a bunch of stuff to get the sucker on cause it's not right for the new parts but hey, it works ... Will get the thing moving down the road for however long, in whatever condition and speed. Come back in see me in awhile, when it goes out and has to be replaced anyway. That's not a good mechanic, while they have the car stripped down, they go ahead and fix it right. Address those obvious issues then, rather than oh, okay good enough.

Again .. these are world league experts with literally 10's of BILLIONS of dollars riding on this platform (gnu/Linux.) Corporations which routinely spend millions per year in improving and contributing to making it better. They actually know what they're doing, why this or that needs to be replaced, why what they implement is better. They are not going to stop and say hey random user boogiewoogie who doesn't even know what an init is, are you okay with these changes ? Is this thing we're doing and paying for okay with you ? You ready to boot your computer with another init bud ?(again, BW doesn't know nor have any reason to care what PID1 even is.) Get real folks, people who chose to remain totally ignorant and waste their own time standing in the way of progress are not doing anything for "diversity". They're being clueless and really only hurting themselves, so honestly who cares ? Each their own, in my view that's only natural too. If my neighbor wants to sit on their porch and hit themselves in the foot with a hammer all day long, cool ... have a good time dude. :D

Okay ... end transmission in this thread. Got it off my chest, whether it had any point or not, shrugs. All those movies on youtube aren't going to watch themselves eh.

[anixer]

Somebody said, why Debian can't, if xyz-distro is kinda thing. Very simply, they know it's not worth the effort, know that current and future developments are better. So don't get don't want to confused with can't. They could do a much better job of anything projects downstream of them can/do. They have mucho more knowledge, skill, experience and resources (as in wo/man-power) vs whatever Debian "based" downstream. They aren't devoting time/effort to something which is going to have a negative impact and end up a waste of however much of the projects time/efforts and resources. To end up with an inferior init and growing problems in the future with keeping with developments upstream of them. In other words it'd be foolish( and they know it.) The folks behind Debian gnu/Linux are not fools.

[freemedia2018]

if we are measuring the merit of things by how much money is poured into them, why shouldnt we just use windows?

[anixer]

If they (Debian project) or other actually qualified parties start squawking, I'll know I have real reason for concern. Avg nixer and gnu/Linux users nowadays in particular, gimme a break, were booting gnu/Linux with an init you had no clue about or had any reason to care was even there forever. Which yeppers was developed and maintained by folks ya don't even know too. Their time, skills, effort and any cash involved all due to them. Next up we have the Wayland vs Xorg thing oncoming too. Not even going to bother typing too much about that or my personal views/plans regarding this next upstream WHAMO. :D

[jeffreyC]

The systemd fans always act as if sysvinit is the only other init in Linux, all their arguments are against sysvinit.