This article is pure FUD

Story: Systemd: Got Choice?Total Replies: 45
Author Content

May 10, 2013
10:58 PM EDT
Linux Advocates is quickly turning into a schizophrentic version of BoycottNovell. One minute the guy is praising Fedora and Yum, the next he is scaremongering complete nonsense about developers and users being coerced into using systemd.

To make it worse this guy often gets his facts wrong and then doesn't correct his articles or comments. I believe the Linux Foundation even asked them to remove their mention from the sponsorship page.

Linux Advocates should change its name to Linux Trollcats.

May 11, 2013
7:09 AM EDT
I've stopped reading his blog some time ago. The guy is a waste of time.

May 11, 2013
4:06 PM EDT
I was going to comment on his cgroups article, but I thought "Why stir the pot"? Yeah, Dietrich seems to be bipolar, or something. So far, Ken Starks is the only voice of reason there.


May 13, 2013
11:57 AM EDT
+1 +1 +1

It seems to me that you sure won't see clickw????-Schmitz responding here all that soon! And to top it off, we know that he IS reading comments on his blog and possibly here -- AAMOF, he's getting notorious for pseudo-""censoring-out"" comments he happens to find distasteful!! Just see that post here of over a week ago ---> 'Censorship isn't a goal. It's a symptom.'

4th c

May 14, 2013
4:56 AM EDT
Well he does have a point, systemd is highly controversial and I know several Linux admins (myself included) who don't like it at all for many reasons.

It's only being adopted by more and more distros because they have no choice, it's getting harder and harder to build a modern distro without systemd because an increasing number of core system functionality depends on it.

Between systemd and Wayland (which hopefully won't succeed to replace X) Linux is moving away too much from it's Unix roots towards a MS Windows like OS. :-(

BTW, attacking the author of that article rather than his arguments is not the best way to get your views across.

May 14, 2013
8:55 AM EDT
> Between systemd and Wayland (which hopefully won't succeed to replace X) Linux is moving away too much from it's Unix roots towards a MS Windows like OS. :-(

It certainly does seem to violate the rule of "make it small, make it do one thing, and do that one thing well".

Also, I'm left to wonder at this "rapid boot" mania. Sure, it's nice, but the difference between 30 seconds and 20 seconds is crazy to overturn the basic rules of UNIX design.

May 14, 2013
10:41 AM EDT
Ok, I've taken a look at what the developers of systemd say about it, and it's clear that they think this is a good idea.

Having all the sockets "open" from the start, allowing the scripts to start all at once and then wait through standard pre-existing ways, does seem like a neat idea. Having sockets point to services that can be started on demand is also neat. And it echoes the consolidation of network services that followed the same path.

Changing from shell scripts to compiled C? No. For two reasons:

1) Flexibility. Yes, they can break. So can anything. If I need to make a change to a service, for whatever reason, I can do so with a simple text editor. This kind of base functionality, maximum flexibility, and independence of one application from every other application, is one of the hallmarks of UNIX and a core reason for its success.

2) Learning. Having these text files availble to read means being able to learn easily what is going on. Standardized tools like grep, awk, sed, may seem inefficient, and I'm sure they are in absolute terms. When they are called I _know_ what they're doing. I don't have to guess at someone's Grand Obfuscated C Contest-winning entry in order to find out what is going on.

And maybe one more reason: While there is always room for improvement, these services are started only once, at boot (or on demand). If an OS is unstable, crashing a lot, then such special gains in speed can seem important.

Linux is not an unstable system. Keeping the boot process as transparent as possible is critical. Shaving another 5 seconds off of the boot time is not.

The repeated citation of how great Mac OSX is in accomplishing the goals of systemd is fine. Apple controls everything soup to nuts in their OSX, and THEIR system it is. No one owns the Linux ecosystem, it is built by consensus and running code. I think that, too, is far more important than 5 seconds of boot time.

If it wasn't, I'd be running OSX.

May 14, 2013
1:00 PM EDT
@Bob - Well said. Very well said.

May 14, 2013
3:03 PM EDT
Dr. G, Thank you for your kind words.

May 15, 2013
4:16 AM EDT
i agree with your reasons for flexibility and learning, they are my main reasons for choosing runtime compiled languages such as pike, python or lisp. however i disagree that shellscripts are by default more readable than C code. on the contrary.

sure, i may want to edit the init script itself, but i'd rather not touch the whole framework that gets that init script stared in the right place. there is nothing stopping me from using a script as the main executable that is started by systemd either, but i expect that such a script would be much simpler than a traditional init script, and thus a win on flexbility.

so unfortunately i believe arguments against C don't hold much water. if we'd argue C vs python, then that would be quite a different story. the kernel is written in C too, and i don't think systemd is only relevant at boot.

greetings, eMBee.

May 15, 2013
11:31 AM EDT
I agree with slacker_mike. In my view systemd is a change that was long past due. A hash of assorted and sordid scripts wasn't the answer and different distributions did them in different ways. As a Linux admin who often comes in as a consultant to clean up mess that isn't documented, having systemd makes administration of such systems much, much easier for me.

May 15, 2013
4:50 PM EDT
"A hash of assorted and sordid scripts"

Well, that depends on the distribution you're using. You have distributions whose developers manifestly write their init scripts "with their feet", as we say in France. And then you have distributions like Slackware whose startup scripts are as clear and well-organized as a poem by Rainer Maria Rilke or Paul Valéry.

Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien.

May 15, 2013
9:30 PM EDT

Boycott Novell did not call itself "Linux Advocates". Personally, based on what several Linux advocates told me, "Linux Advocates" is not about advocacy. Dietrich, unlike Katherine, admits it's a kind of experiment to see who passes his "advocacy" test (I can find you the direct quote); he already used to site to attack -- in public -- some longterm advocates.

Boycott Novell was created in November 2006 shortly after the campaign to tax GNU/Linux (now Android and Chrome OS) using patents had begun. We needed to contain the bad precedent by removing the bad practice or at least marginalising it. It could become an unchallenged norm if it weren't for activism. A lot of people misunderstood Boycott Novell because Novell and Microsoft employees (among others) worked hard to demonise and misrepresent the site, including me personally.

May 15, 2013
9:44 PM EDT
Quoting:Dietrich, unlike Katherine, admits it's a kind of experiment to see who passes his "advocacy" test (I can find you the direct quote);

I'd like to see it.


May 15, 2013
10:09 PM EDT
Message #0:

> Thanks for the heads up, it does not look good. He was really pulling

> together an interesting community. I'll have a closer look at it but it would

> be a shame if the purpose of pulling the community together was to troll,

> harass and waste the time of the members.


> He tells us,


> "I live in search of finding what is hidden away, just under the surface

> exterior of things. You get so you realize that instinctively things are not

> quite the way they seem. You see, people only tell you what they want you to

> know and you see only what they want you to see. "


> Maybe he should have named his community, "Paranoid Linux Interrogations".




> On Tuesday, April 02, 2013, Roy Schestowitz wrote:

>> Dietrich Schmitz has now clashed with no less than three #linux

>> advocates including two colleagues. Not good.


Message #1

> I'm starting to think it's a set up, that he's solicited authors to waste

> their time and make fun of them. Time will tell but he's already deleted

> enough legitimate opinion for me to consider his site hostile territory like

> ZDNet. I never considered the stuff he passed along worth following closely

> because much of it was the usual troll juice. I avoided commenting in his

> group until he made the posts public but worried all along that Google's

> "communities" gave too much power to one person to censor and waste time. Now

> I see that some of my concerns were justified.


> I decided to ask him directly what he's doing here and he tried to drag me off

> to his comment system,




> Now he's acting like a smart ass and calling me names again.


> On Wednesday, April 03, 2013, you wrote:

>> > Why would a "Linux Advocates" site give a voice to either?


>> He didn't know better...

Message #2

> I'm sorry to see more of this hostility. Yes, he deleted the comment. He

> left a comment berating him for trolling, but the overall editorship is

> hostile and dishonest. That's two posts designed to belittle the people he's

> invited to write for him and later baited. What a nasty waste of everyone's

> time.


> I'm glad you preserved your comment, Roy. He uses deleted comments to accuse

> people of things that no one can verify. He did this to me in the thread that

> convinced me that it was a dangerous waste of time to comment in the Google

> group. He did it to me again when I asked him why he was abusing Robert

> Pogson.





> I would be very happy, Fabian, for you publish your free software articles to

> my gnu/linux advocates group. My only condition is that you do not openly

> promote non free software and that you put up with or correct my comments

> warning people about non free components.




> Swapnil also has an excellent group and feed for his Muktware publication,

> which I'm sure everyone is aware of.





> That's how free software advocacy on G+ should be done.



> /*********** remaining criticism ***************

> G'Kar • 15 hours ago −

> Oh, please, Mr. Schmitz! You're the one embarassing yourself here. If one

> reads your exchange with Mr. Scherschel top to bottom, then a certain pattern

> becomes clear. Your first answer to Mr. Scherschel is NOT an attempt to start a

> serious discussion in any way. In it you merely argue semantics and belittle

> him. And take this gem of yours:


> "I hope you didn't hurt yourself when your knee hit your chiny chin chin. ;)"


> That's a reasonable mode of discussion? Oh, sure, you added an emoticon. That

> makes it all better.


> As I see it, not one of your comments added anything of substance. You just

> threw at Mr. Scherschel meaningless one-liners. And then you are a) surprised

> that he blows a fuse and b) pissed that he doesn't conduct himself properly,

> even though YOU basically did everything possible to make this happen? It's a

> good example of hypocrisy that you hide behind someone (supposedly) being

> impolite instead of bringing forth counter-arguments which have some merit WRT

> to the issue being actually discussed.

> ********** end accurate synopsis *************/



> On Wednesday, April 17, 2013, Roy Schestowitz wrote:


>> nd.html#comment-form


>> Mr. Dietrich Schmitz. You sleep in the bed you make. I never heard of

>> you before a site called "Linux Advocates" was launched. In it, after

>> you had invited me to contribute, I saw you run provocative (one might

>> say trollish) pieces that slam Linux stuff -- a site run by the

>> obscure - IMO - self-professed advocate whom I never heard of. -- one

>> who bans Linux advocates (at least 5 so far). Pogson, Hill, Swapnil,

>> Fab...


>> Some of your posts have been nothing but personal attacks on Linux

>> advocates.


>> Congratulations on creating a site called Linux Advocates -- a site

>> whose main function is to invite Linux advocates and then gag or

>> ridicule them. If you delete this comment -- as you often do (your

>> censorship has earned you bad reputation in private communication), I

>> will 'Streisand Effect' it.


>> Censorship in a site called Linux Advocates shows either extreme

>> insecurity or a well-calculated attempt to vilify Linux advocates.


>> Good luck with the site. Based on what I saw behind the scenes, you

>> are left alone. You sleep in the bed you make.

Message #3

> That FEWT person who called Pogson "poison"? Oh, that explains a lot.


> On Tuesday, April 02, 2013, you wrote:

>> He recently gave the platform to someone who trolls Techrights and calls

>> RMS pedophile. It's one whom he gave a GUEST ARTICLE position; I choose

>> not to censor or silence, so I said nothing.


May 15, 2013
10:12 PM EDT
Message #5 (last one):

> -------- Original Message --------

> Subject: Re: A comment he'll probably delete...

> Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 22:46:05 +0100

> From: Roy Schestowitz <>

> Reply-To:

> Organisation: Schestowitz

> To: Fabian A. Scherschel <>

> Scherschel <>


>> Thanks for the fair comments, Roy. We may not always see eye to

>> eye (all of us), but I am glad we all know better than acting like

>> that. :)


>> Fab


> He has just deleted my comment. This guy, Dietrich, is no better than

> 'FOSS' Patents, also using the same platform in which to suppress

> comments and attack Linux entities while pretending to be pro-Linux.


> I suggest we occasionally warn people about this site which banned

> every single Linux advocate which was in it.


> Will tested him by asking what his goals were. Ask Will what Dietrich

> said in response. It's very telling.


> Florian #2.


May 15, 2013
10:49 PM EDT

I will give you that, at least BoycottNovell was more honest in regards to what type of site it was. Linux Advocates is a real shame considering the name of the site.

May 16, 2013
12:10 AM EDT
ugh, can you all keep this stuff out of LXer?

no need to drag this into here too, and especially not if it is quoting private emails. (if these are not private emails, then please link to the original messages instead of quoting them at length)

i am just a reader here, but i am interested in discussing the technical merits of the software we work with (and that includes mr schmitz or anyone else's opinion on those merits) and the social implications of Free Software in itself.

but i have no interest whatsoever to read about or discuss the personal agenda of anyone contributing here (be it in form of articles, comments or code)

greetings, eMBee.

May 16, 2013
8:23 AM EDT
eMBee AFAIK The Linux Advocates website is no longer a news site and never was, but it has become a personal vendetta website (rogue) against individuals in the Linux Community. I do agree what a shame it has become that we have these two representing the Linux Community. AFAIK the website should be shut down, I think now it would be in there best interest to do so ASAP.

May 16, 2013
9:03 AM EDT
> AFAIK the website should be shut down, I think now it would be in there best interest to do so ASAP.

Well, the website is private property (probably of a hosting company), and we don't have the authority to do so. Nor, in the legal system used in the US, should we.

The most that could be done is to set up a petition with the hosting company asking them to no longer host the site. And even then moving the site to another hosting company would be simple and take very little time.

So the best thing to do is probably exactly what this thread is doing. Publicize the nature of the site so that everyone knows exactly what kind of site it is, and can treat it accordingly.

May 16, 2013
9:50 AM EDT
Those of you here who are continuing to attack the messenger rather than the message aren't doing your argument any favours.

Try coming up with arguments why systemd is such a good thing (as opposed to a very badly implemented crock of software that attempts to fix something that ain't broken) rather than focusing on personal attacks. We ain't in the kindergarden here!

May 16, 2013
11:22 AM EDT
> We ain't in the kindergarden here!

I've got several deleted threads that would stand as counter examples....

May 16, 2013
12:39 PM EDT
This thread gives me a headache.

I just want to report that I'm running the systemd-enabled Fedora 18, and it boots quickly (and reliably).

May 16, 2013
2:46 PM EDT
> it boots quickly (and reliably)

I doubt the functionality of systemd was ever in question.

Merely its necessity.

May 17, 2013
7:33 PM EDT
I'll have a new article on systemd soon which I hope will be seen as factual and useful.

As far as Linux Advocates is concerned, I've been invited to write for the site which, BTW, I like and see as valuable. (Asbestos suit on.) I've accepted the invitation so, whether for better or for worse, there will be some different content.

May 18, 2013
3:39 PM EDT

>> Linux Advocates is quickly turning into a schizophrentic version of BoycottNovell.

If Schmitz manages to pseudo-""censor-out"" comments he happens to find distasteful even on *caitlyn's* writings at Linux Advocates (like he did to schestowitz above) and readers avoid even caitlyn's writings on the site 'cause of this, then would this avoidance be GIRLcotting rather than Boycotting LA?? ;D


May 18, 2013
8:24 PM EDT
I, like Caitlyn, disregarded advice from 3 Linux advocates and carried on writing until one day I made the "offence" of defending a fellow Linux advocate, Fab

May 18, 2013
9:35 PM EDT
There is a follow-up article I wrote:

This turns over the coin with

Systemd: Got Choice being 'against'


Cgroups: A BIG WIN for Systemd being 'pro'

I have reached the conclusion that systemd is 'a good thing' primarily because of the net benefit of cgroups.

As such, 'at this juncture', I feel comfortable giving systemd my full support.

Read the above story.

Thanks Dietrich

May 24, 2013
7:43 PM EDT
schestowitz: I won't be writing there and I should have listened to you and to Andrew Wyat up front.

May 24, 2013
8:08 PM EDT
A triad of telling snippets from the above-linked piece on 'The Linux Works' blog:

Quoting:Last week I had announced in the LXer forums that I would be a contributing author to Linux Advocates. That was followed by a post announcing that I would be joining their team. I was honestly excited about this. I felt that writing for Linux Advocates would add credibility to my stories and bring me back some of the wider audience I had when I wrote for O'Reilly Media. The additional exposure would help me market my consulting business which brings Linux and FOSS solutions to businesses and organizations looking to reduce IT costs and enhance the reliability, stability and security of their IT infrastructure.

Quoting:Only then did I really read and digest everything else Mr. Schmitz wanted me to do, like setup an account in his domain so that I could have a Linux Advocates e-mail address. He also wanted me to install a Zemanta plugin for Chrome. I have deliberately chosen not to use Chrome (an article about that soon) and wasn't happy about that at all. I went to install the Zemanta plugin for Firefox instead and was presented with a Microsoft-style End User License Agreement (EULA). As many in the open source community would expect, that set off all sorts of red flags for me.

Quoting:Suddenly, I found myself reading a license agreement for a proprietary piece of software that explicitly had terms relating to collecting and retaining data.

I felt deeply uncomfortable and didn't go through with the installation. It's one thing to be forced to use proprietary software to service a client or do work required by an employed. It's quite another for someone who is getting my labor at no cost and benefiting from it to demand I install something on my own system. I first asked if Zemanta was mandatory and then wrote a follow-up e-mail making clear that I wasn't about to install it.

Mr. Schmitz' response was direct and to the point. If I can't accommodate how he chooses to run his site then I should go elsewhere.

Similar to one of the above commentator's pieces from nearly three years ago, Latest Examples of Microsoft’s “Embrace, Extend, Extinguish” (EEE), shall the current case be an ongoing example of Advocate, Advertise, Antagonize (AAA) by the original self-proclaimed Linux "advocate" who is the very subject of this thread ???


May 25, 2013
5:44 PM EDT
From what I can gather, Zemanta is a tool designed to increase a blog's audience via the gathering of data inside of their own network of bloggers (which you join by installing the software and using it on your own blog etc...) and search engine optimization.

Basically, what happens is that related content pops up as one is writing a particular blog post and/or article. It can act as a glorified tool of link bait.

I personally don't know the effectiveness of the software in question, though they do have a slick ad for it that can be viewed here:

It's also available for other platforms such as Blogger, Tumblr, etc....

I'm not so sure that such a tool is appropriate for a Linux Advocacy site. Then again, I'm not the one who runs said site in the first place, so it's clearly not my call. With that said, I personally wouldn't be using a tool such as Zemanta on my own site in the first place, because:

1.) It uses e107, so it's not compatible as far as I know.

2.) I run a personal blog using WordPress, and there's already an SEO plugin at work. I've surfed plenty of times and became annoyed at the ads taking up my screen space, so on my own personal blog, I choose not to have any ads anyway.

3.) Link baiting can be fun, but if the source turns out to be inaccurate, there goes your credibility.... straight down the toilet.

May 25, 2013
9:44 PM EDT
Although I can't comment on this article as I haven't read it and will not be doing so it seems to me folks should just stay away from LinuxAdvocates and simply not give it the traffic he appears to crave, I stopped going yonks ago simply because very few of the articles made sense in regards to advocating linux which is IMO a serious misnomer.

I do wish though that Lxer had some kind of article voting system (karma) or at least a source filter to prevent certain articles being visible.

May 26, 2013
7:34 AM EDT
It does. This discussion forum.

While I often decry some of the totally pointless and off-base selections that DO get posted here, it's kinda like linux, in that it offers a choice. If you don't like a story/article, you can always post your thoughts on why you dislike it. Or not. Or jes walk away. Like linux, the choice is yours. ;)

May 26, 2013
10:55 PM EDT
@caitlyn: I made the same error you made by not listening to 3 victims before me. it's an ego-trip site, where he also refers to himself as a third person.

May 26, 2013
10:59 PM EDT
@vainrveenr I have been advocating GNU/Linux full time and beyond (for no pay) for nearly a decade now and not once did I come across Dietrich.

May 27, 2013
7:01 AM EDT

>> If you don't like a story/article, you can always post your thoughts on why you dislike it. Or not. Or jes walk away. Like linux, the choice is yours. ;)

Yep, pretty much like Henry Ford's cars in the early part of the 20th century: "You have the choice of any color of car you want, as long as its black. Oh, yer accusin' us of JUST havin' black are ya'? Well, we might have a handful of white cars among the 10K blacks we offer you folks..." ;)

Go see how the pseudo-"censorer" and master link-baiter's lust to overseed/*post-flood* onto the forums using repeated strokes on his keybd keeps working for him...


May 30, 2013
12:45 PM EDT
Quoting:@vainrveenr I have been advocating GNU/Linux full time and beyond (for no pay) for nearly a decade now and not once did I come across Dietrich.

Perhaps the self-proclaimed Linux "advocate" in question is absolutely forced to come out-of-hiding, and must do so now, due to the situation described within the penultimate paragraph of the blog piece It Seems I Won't Be Writing For Linux Advocates After All ??


May 30, 2013
1:02 PM EDT
I wish there were more people as principled as Caitlyn. It takes guts to take a stand on something where your livelihood is affected. I know that Caitlyn was going to be contributing for free, but exposure and credibility are the lifeblood of writers.

May 30, 2013
2:23 PM EDT
Quoting: I have been advocating GNU/Linux full time and beyond (for no pay) for nearly a decade now and not once did I come across Dietrich.

For what it's worth, I've seen his (Dietrich Schmitz's) posts for many years in the comments sections of ZDNet articles. And IIRC all that time he signed himself as "Your Linux Advocate".

Perhaps that extensive (over?) exposure to the ZD Net forums explains his approach?

May 30, 2013
5:05 PM EDT

It's interesting that you should mention ZDNet. It is, by far, *the worst* place to be a 'Linux Advocate'. Yet I took arrows in the chest for six years there..

With that experience I have formed a policy for moderation which is as follows:

1) If you cannot communicate your thoughts in a polite cordial way, then your comments will be summarily deleted. 2) If you are deleted more than once, I will blacklist you.

My goal of keeping Linux Advocates from turning into a cage fight is working.

Very little trouble with comments.

Call it 'hard nosed' or whatever, moderating is necessary in today's world where millions of people feel they are not held accountable for their behavior on the Internet the same way they are in the general public.

I've NEVER used an alias on the Internet because it gives rise to bad behavior.


May 30, 2013
5:18 PM EDT
Quoting:1) If you can communicate your thoughts in a polite cordial way, then your comments will be summarily deleted.

Yep, that's what people have been saying.


May 30, 2013
5:24 PM EDT
@djohnston Funny. It's been corrected. Thanks.

May 31, 2013
12:31 AM EDT
No full comment here (yet!) Anyone in particular got any pseudo-witty putdowns to pick off 1-by-1 those of us who care to speak up on the subject of this systemd FUD?


May 31, 2013
12:37 AM EDT
@flufferbeer You are shooting blanks. Got nothing intelligent to say? Just personalizations?

How are you on the issues? Not good I guess.

There's nothing in your comments that would lead me to believe you have any interest in the topic. Just attacks.

And if you actually went to the trouble of 'reading' the follow on article, I look at cgroups and give systemd a 'thumbs up' approval.

But that would require too much 'thinking' on your part.

Go back under your rock.

May 31, 2013
1:34 AM EDT
Dietrich said to BernardSwiss, (corrected version):

Quoting:1) If you cannot communicate your thoughts in a polite cordial way, then your comments will be summarily deleted.

Then he said to flufferbeer:

Quoting:But that would require too much 'thinking' on your part.

Go back under your rock.

Is that your way of being polite and cordial? flufferbeer was merely asking if anyone had something to say on the subject of systemd. Do as I say, not as I do, eh, Dietrich?


May 31, 2013
11:00 AM EDT

Oh dear. That was rude of me wasn't it? I am so sorry.

So, what else do you have besides nothing?

Your preoccupation with me and not the topic is interesting.

Maybe you'd like to be my pen pal? PM me with your thoughts: dietrich at dtschmitz dot com

Are you on one of those 'character assassination' crusades?

To bad you haven't got anything intelligent to say on the topic.

Instead you like many others behave like "pavlov's dog" howl and bark at the mere sight of me. LOL You are too funny.

Oh dear, I think I might have been rude again without realizing it. So. sorry.

I must keep that in check. ;)

Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]

Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!