- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Slackware: Is Systemd Inevitable?
|
|
|
Comments (2)
The typical shell script interpreter may be Bash, but many Bash-isms in Slackware's boot scripts are frowned on, in order to be ash-compatible in an init ramdisk boot.
That said, Bash now has had built-in support for rudimentary multi-processing for a few years now, so it isn't totally with systemd's intentions.
That said, Bash now has had built-in support for rudimentary multi-processing for a few years now, so it isn't totally with systemd's intentions.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post
I suspect d-man's suspicions are correct, that Pat is not want to change to systemd without thoroughly researching the long term ramifications of doing so. As a longtime Slackware user, I also can see sticking with Slack's long held philosophy, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". OTOH, despite what many might believe, Slackware is NOT stuck in "1995". I once did a comparison between the latest Ubuntu release and the latest Slackware release, which were pretty close together, at that time. Many of the mainstream installed programs and applications in Slack were newer revs than those in Ubuntu. Naturally, due to different release cycles, this changed rapidly, but the fact remains. But, I digress.
D-mans article is a door on more than systemd, it's a door on the future in terms of parallel computing and its basis, declarative language. This may be the future of all computing, whether we users like it or not. As a patently non-programmer, this is all waaay over my head, but I understand how it may effect the direction of computing in the long term.
I see Slack torn between two historical traditions. One, "Slackware is the most Unix-like". Yet, the other is, "....if you learn Slackware, you learn Linux". Well, if Linux is going to turn down the the parallel/declarative road, Slack will surely have to follow. Or not. Yes, Slack is a bash script centric Linux distro. Defiantly so. But, if Linux leads the way in parallel computing, as I suspect it will, Slackware jes might become an OS anachronism. I would not like to see that. Only time will tell.
Hmmm.... SlackBSD actually sounds kinda nice. ;)