Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?

(very unimportant contribution, please ignore) any change to this things, must be done in the benefit of future users, making the internet a less weird place, with less exceptions everyone else have already learned a .edu domain is probably a USA university, and some .mil domain is the usa milita

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

George Herbert wrote: On Oct 21, 2014, at 6:03 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote: GNOME is probably the linchpin. But it's not just RH. It's Debian, and by extension *buntu, and SuSE, and at least one other major independent parent distro that I can't think of just now... And as far as I know, it's

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

On 22/10/14 10:41, Miles Fidelman wrote: > Which leads me to ask - those of you running server farms - what distros > are popular these days, for server-side operations? We've been running > Debian like forever (by way of Solaris and redhat) - but this systemd > thing is making me rethink things.

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

Before leaving Debian, things to think: - will systemd be officialy the only system available ? - if so, won't we get a way to bypass that ? I'm not gonna throw Debian away due to such a mess, without fighting hard, and I think you should do the same: talk, patch if needed, show you're here If al

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

na...@jack.fr.eu.org (na...@jack.fr.eu.org) wrote: > I'm not gonna throw Debian away due to such a mess, without fighting > hard, and I think you should do the same: talk, patch if needed, show > you're here ...and sit it out with wheezy-LTS... Elmar.

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

> Which leads me to ask - those of you running server farms - what > distros are popular these days, for server-side operations? been running bsd forever. but moving to debian and ganeti, as bsd does not host virtualization. would love it if debian ditched this systemd monstrosity and provided s

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

Subject: Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch Date: Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 01:44:17PM -0700 Quoting Eric Brunner-Williams (brun...@nic-naa.net): > >systemd is insanity. > > see also smit. (assumption, we're talking about AIX smit here) smit is transp

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

> > Which leads me to ask - those of you running server farms - what > > distros are popular these days, for server-side operations? > > been running bsd forever. but moving to debian and ganeti, as bsd does > not host virtualization. Simply not true; http://bhyve.org/ It is a bit immature co

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

On 22 October 2014 11:34, wrote: > Before leaving Debian, things to think: > - will systemd be officialy the only system available ? > - if so, won't we get a way to bypass that ? > And one other thought... is it really that bad? Personally I like it a lot better than sysV plus inittab plus dae

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

>>> Which leads me to ask - those of you running server farms - what >>> distros are popular these days, for server-side operations? >> been running bsd forever. but moving to debian and ganeti, as bsd >> does not host virtualization. > Simply not true; http://bhyve.org/ > It is a bit immature com

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 06:17:09PM +0100, Israel G. Lugo wrote: > The binary logs for example worry me, especially corruption issues: As they should. Binary logs occasionally make sense in environments where the amount of information to be logged is huge and the rate at which it accumulates is ve

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

> >>> Which leads me to ask - those of you running server farms - what > >>> distros are popular these days, for server-side operations? > >> been running bsd forever. but moving to debian and ganeti, as bsd > >> does not host virtualization. > > Simply not true; http://bhyve.org/ > > It is a bit

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 12:00:52PM +0100, Daniel Ankers wrote: > On 22 October 2014 11:34, wrote: > > Before leaving Debian, things to think: > > - will systemd be officialy the only system available ? > > - if so, won't we get a way to bypass that ? > > And one other thought... is it really that

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

When it's working, no doupt, I'll be fine I don't care (or just a few) about when it's working. The point is: what about it's failure ? On the ethical point of view, systemd is killed anyway On 22/10/2014 13:00, Daniel Ankers wrote: > On 22 October 2014 11:34, > wrot

Re: Jared Mauch

Congrats Jared!!! On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 22:29:33 -0500 Larry Sheldon wrote: I don't remember seeing mention of this here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69-qhoS9sSw h/t Suresh Ramasubramian on Facebook. (I didn't copy and paste any names--hope I got them right.) -- The unique Characteristics

RE: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

> From: Bryan Tong > The final fact is that bash itself is a dirty language that developers hate > and system administrators love. Excuse me? I've been administering systems for over twenty years now and I can't say that I've ever even once chosen to use bash over any alternative; no matter h

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 6:12 AM, Joe Greco wrote: > when so much effort has been put into that very issue, specifically so > that we could gain the advantages of a BSD hypervisor that supported > ZFS natively... [snip] If you want native ZFS support, then Solaris x86-64+Zones+KVM or SmartOS.

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 12:34:17 +0200, na...@jack.fr.eu.org said: > Before leaving Debian, things to think: > - will systemd be officialy the only system available ? > - if so, won't we get a way to bypass that ? Somebody already forked systemd at a point before it completely lost the plot. http://u

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On 10/22/2014 04:04 AM, Rich Kulawiec wrote: > I've seen similar tactical mistakes when developers insist that > information *must* be stored in a relational database -- even though > plain old ordinary text files are perfectly adequate for the task, > are easier to debug, are easier to fix, and ea

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

na...@jack.fr.eu.org wrote: Before leaving Debian, things to think: - will systemd be officialy the only system available ? - if so, won't we get a way to bypass that ? officially, there will be support for multiple init systems; in practice, the installer doesn't provide an option, and trying

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On 22. okt. 2014 03:40, Matt Palmer wrote: > On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 07:20:12PM -0500, Jimmy Hess wrote: >> Yikes. What's next? Built-in DNS server + LDAP/Hesiod + Kerberos + >> SMB/Active Directory client and server + Solitaire + Network >> Neighborhood functionality built into the program ?

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 7:48 PM, Israel G. Lugo wrote: > > Not intending to start a flame war here. Bull. If you've been around the FOSS community even for a short while, you'd know that systemd has become a religious topic akin to Emacs vs. Vi "discussions" etc. I realize that many of the peop

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

Jeffrey Ollie wrote: On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 7:48 PM, Israel G. Lugo wrote: Not intending to start a flame war here. Bull. If you've been around the FOSS community even for a short while, you'd know that systemd has become a religious topic akin to Emacs vs. Vi "discussions" etc. I realize t

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote: > > Seems to me, this has been a very rational discussion, Hardly. The discussion so far has been weighted very heavily on the side of Dana Carvey's "Grumpy Old Man"-style whining. "That's the way it was and we liked it!". The people that

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On 22-10-2014 17:12, Miles Fidelman wrote: > Seems to me, this has been a very rational discussion, confined to one > very identifiable thread, containing what at least this reader finds > very useful (operational impacts of systemd in server-side > environments, and what alternatives people are lo

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

Hardly. The discussion so far has been weighted very heavily on the side of Dana Carvey's "Grumpy Old Man"-style whining. "That's the way it was and we liked it!". The people that like systemd (like myself) have wisely learned that the people that hate systemd, hate it mostly because it's diff

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On 22-10-2014 17:30, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: > Hardly. The discussion so far has been weighted very heavily on the > side of Dana Carvey's "Grumpy Old Man"-style whining. "That's the way > it was and we liked it!". The people that like systemd (like myself) > have wisely learned that the people that h

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 12:43:53PM -0400, C. Jon Larsen wrote: > Incorrect assumption. systemd is a massive security hole waiting to happen > and it does not follow the unix philosophy of done 1 thing and do it > well/correct. It does seem to me that this angle, at least, is on-topic for NANOG,

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

> On Oct 22, 2014, at 9:30 AM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: > > The people that like systemd (like myself) have wisely learned that > the people that hate systemd, hate it mostly because it's different > from what came before and don't want to change. There's no way to > argue rationally with that.

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

Andrew Sullivan writes: > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 12:43:53PM -0400, C. Jon Larsen wrote: > >> Incorrect assumption. systemd is a massive security hole waiting to happen >> and it does not follow the unix philosophy of done 1 thing and do it >> well/correct. > > But I have no clue what one can do

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 11:43 AM, C. Jon Larsen wrote: > >> Hardly. The discussion so far has been weighted very heavily on the >> side of Dana Carvey's "Grumpy Old Man"-style whining. "That's the way >> it was and we liked it!". >> >> The people that like systemd (like myself) have wisely learne

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

I'm reminded of the remark often attributed to DEC CEO Ken Olson, roughly: With VMS (their big complex OS) it might take hours searching through manuals to find a feature you need while with Unix you can determine in seconds that it is not available. On October 21, 2014 at 16:10 asulli...

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 12:35 PM, George Herbert wrote: > > > > >> On Oct 22, 2014, at 9:30 AM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: >> >> The people that like systemd (like myself) have wisely learned that >> the people that hate systemd, hate it mostly because it's different >> from what came before and don't

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

On October 21, 2014 at 16:43 morrowc.li...@gmail.com (Christopher Morrow) wrote: > On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 4:10 PM, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 03:11:55PM -0400, Barry Shein wrote: > >> But > >> for example some of my servers boot in seconds. > > > > One is reminded o

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On October 21, 2014 at 13:44 brun...@nic-naa.net (Eric Brunner-Williams) wrote: > > systemd is insanity. > > see also smit. SMIT! Rhymes with -- -Barry Shein The World | b...@theworld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 01:35:26PM -0400, Daniel Corbe wrote: > Not to get even further off topic here but when was the last time you > maintained a BSD system? FreeBSD (at least) adopted binary package > management as its preferred interface to ports through pkg-ng somewhere > in the 9-RELEASE

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On 10/22/2014 10:43 AM, C. Jon Larsen wrote: Hardly. The discussion so far has been weighted very heavily on the side of Dana Carvey's "Grumpy Old Man"-style whining. "That's the way it was and we liked it!". The people that like systemd (like myself) have wisely learned that the people that

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 2:13 PM, John Schiel wrote: > On 10/22/2014 10:43 AM, C. Jon Larsen wrote: >> >> Incorrect assumption. systemd is a massive security hole waiting to happen >> and it does not follow the unix philosophy of done 1 thing and do it >> well/correct. > > i was beginning to wonder

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 13:13:29 -0600, John Schiel said: > i was beginning to wonder how secure systemd is also. One of the 3 CIA pillars of security is "availability". And if it's oh-dark-30, figuring out what symlink is supposed to be where for a given failed systemd unit can be a tad challenging

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:31:02 -0400, Barry Shein wrote: Perhaps you don't remember the days when an fsck was basically mandatory and could take 15-20 minutes on a large disk. Journaling has all but done away with fsck. You'd have to go *way* back to have systems that ran a full fsck on every

Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?

On October 22, 2014 at 01:25 i...@itechgeek.com (ITechGeek) wrote: > Instead of multiple govs trying to use .gov or .mil, the best idea would be > to collapse .gov under .gov.us and .mil under .mil.us (Much like how other > countries already work). And of course they'll also keep .GOV and .MIL

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

> Which leads me to ask - those of you running server farms - what > distros are popular these days, for server-side operations? We've > been running Debian like forever (by way of Solaris and redhat) - but > this systemd thing is making me rethink things. Seems like an awful > lot of folks are n

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

On October 22, 2014 at 12:00 md1...@md1clv.com (Daniel Ankers) wrote: > On 22 October 2014 11:34, wrote: > > > Before leaving Debian, things to think: > > - will systemd be officialy the only system available ? > > - if so, won't we get a way to bypass that ? > > > > And one other thoug

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

Barry Schein: > I'm reminded of the remark often attributed to DEC CEO Ken Olson, > roughly: > > With VMS (their big complex OS) it might take hours searching > through manuals to find a feature you need while with Unix you can > determine in seconds that it is not available. and how did th

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On October 22, 2014 at 07:04 r...@gsp.org (Rich Kulawiec) wrote: > I've seen similar tactical mistakes when developers insist that > information *must* be stored in a relational database -- even though > plain old ordinary text files are perfectly adequate for the task, > are easier to debug,

RE: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On October 22, 2014 at 11:36 jamie.s.bow...@raytheon.com (Jamie Bowden) wrote: > > From: Bryan Tong > > > > The final fact is that bash itself is a dirty language that developers hate > > and system administrators love. > > Excuse me? I've been administering systems for over twenty year

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

David Ford wrote: Which leads me to ask - those of you running server farms - what distros are popular these days, for server-side operations? We've been running Debian like forever (by way of Solaris and redhat) - but this systemd thing is making me rethink things. Seems like an awful lot of f

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On October 22, 2014 at 05:43 l...@satchell.net (Stephen Satchell) wrote: > > How did this discussion get into NANOG? :) Because in the field of automotive engineering we are the ones who actually need to get down the road on time, reliably, and consistently while the automotive engineers prob

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

Which leads me to ask - those of you running server farms - what distros are popular these days, for server-side operations? We've been running Debian like forever (by way of Solaris and redhat) - but this systemd thing is making me rethink things. Seems like an awful lot of folks are now desi

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On 10/22/2014 01:30 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 13:13:29 -0600, John Schiel said: i was beginning to wonder how secure systemd is also. One of the 3 CIA pillars of security is "availability". And if it's oh-dark-30, figuring out what symlink is supposed to be where

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 2:30 PM, wrote: > On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 13:13:29 -0600, John Schiel said: > >> i was beginning to wonder how secure systemd is also. > > One of the 3 CIA pillars of security is "availability". And if > it's oh-dark-30, figuring out what symlink is supposed to be where > for

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

> the vast majority of negative tongue wagging regarding systemd is ill > informed. can we skip the ad homina and leave that for the systemd dev fora? > does systemd have growing pains? definitely. are some egos involved? > sure. can systemd be far reaching? yes, is such reach mandated? > no. us

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 3:22 PM, John Schiel wrote: > > On 10/22/2014 01:30 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: >> >> On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 13:13:29 -0600, John Schiel said: >> >>> i was beginning to wonder how secure systemd is also. >> >> One of the 3 CIA pillars of security is "availability". And

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

Randy Bush wrote: the vast majority of negative tongue wagging regarding systemd is ill informed. can we skip the ad homina and leave that for the systemd dev fora? does systemd have growing pains? definitely. are some egos involved? sure. can systemd be far reaching? yes, is such reach mandat

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 19:35:51 -, David Ford said: > into a common bus. not everything in systemd is a requirement to run it. > just because a unit is offered for dhcp or ntp, doesn't mean you are > required to use it. Actually, systemd 216 will cram systemd-timesyncd down your throat even if y

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

Jeffrey Ollie wrote: On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 3:22 PM, John Schiel wrote: On 10/22/2014 01:30 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 13:13:29 -0600, John Schiel said: i was beginning to wonder how secure systemd is also. One of the 3 CIA pillars of security is "availability".

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

Once upon a time, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu said: > Actually, systemd 216 will cram systemd-timesyncd down your throat even > if you had ntpd installed. Yeah, I think a lot of the upset with systemd is not so much with the core daemon that runs as PID 1, but with the massive scope creep that the sy

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Randy Bush wrote: >> the vast majority of negative tongue wagging regarding systemd is ill >> informed. > > can we skip the ad homina and leave that for the systemd dev fora? I don't think that it's an ad homina attack, as it's pretty clear that many of the people

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 3:48 PM, wrote: > On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 19:35:51 -, David Ford said: > >> into a common bus. not everything in systemd is a requirement to run it. >> just because a unit is offered for dhcp or ntp, doesn't mean you are >> required to use it. > > Actually, systemd 216 wil

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

> 4. More fundamentally, 0-dark-30 events are almost always unexpected > (other than in the sense of Murphy's Law), and tricky to resolve - one > has hopefully prepared for the expected. "If it was part of the 'plan' it’s an event; if it is not then it’s a 'disaster'"

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 11:30:57AM -0500, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: > The people that like systemd (like myself) have wisely learned that > the people that hate systemd, hate it mostly because it's different > from what came before and don't want to change. That's an entirely unfair characterization.

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 9:17 PM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: > I think that Debian's plan to allow multiple init systems > (irregardless of which one is default) is a bad plan. The non-default > ones won't get any love - at some point they'll just stop working (or > indeed, work at all). Indeed.

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

Bah, boot speed; On my server, boot is slow down by hardware initialization. The soft side is quite low. But the point is not "makes things faster from 15 to 14 sec is useless". The point is : it's good, but at what price ? As you said, there were many improvements over the past. What was the "c

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

Well said, Rich. Rich Kulawiec wrote: On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 11:30:57AM -0500, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: The people that like systemd (like myself) have wisely learned that the people that hate systemd, hate it mostly because it's different from what came before and don't want to change. That's an

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 3:49 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote: > > 1. Experimentation and learning curve take time. That's a real cost that's > being imposed. What makes systemd different from any other technology in that respect? > It's not clear that the benefits outweigh the costs of the status quo.

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Rich Kulawiec wrote: > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 11:30:57AM -0500, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: >> The people that like systemd (like myself) have wisely learned that >> the people that hate systemd, hate it mostly because it's different >> from what came before and don't wa

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On 10/22/2014 02:43 PM, Rich Kulawiec wrote: > A Leatherman pocket multitool is highly useful: I've had one for years. > It's great. Until you need two screwdrivers at the same time...at which > point it becomes obvious why serious mechanics/craftsmen carry around a > toolbox with dozens of tools

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:48 PM, wrote: > Bah, boot speed; > > On my server, boot is slow down by hardware initialization. > The soft side is quite low. > > But the point is not "makes things faster from 15 to 14 sec is useless". > The point is : it's good, but at what price ? I agree that "boot

Self destruction in open source systems (was Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT])

On 10/22/2014 06:01, Randy Bush wrote: Which leads me to ask - those of you running server farms - what distros are popular these days, for server-side operations? been running bsd forever. but moving to debian and ganeti, as bsd does not host virtualization. Simply not true; http://bhyve.org/

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On 10/23/2014 12:05 AM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: > systemd is a tool designed to get the system to a state where "real > work" can be done. NTP servers, DHCP clients, consoles, aren't the > real work of a system, or at least I hope not, because that would be > boring to me. That idea sounds interes

Re: Jared Mauch

Congratulations Jared. Excellent work as always. Regards Abdul On 10/21/14 8:29 PM, "Larry Sheldon" wrote: >I don't remember seeing mention of this here: > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69-qhoS9sSw > >h/t Suresh Ramasubramian on Facebook. > >(I didn't copy and paste any names--hope I got th

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Israel G. Lugo wrote: > > For example, I'm very interested in NTP and accurate timekeeping -- > mostly as a personal hobby, but it's been useful at work as well. I for > one would definitely not consider NTP one of those "details" that just > "come with the bootup

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

Israel G. Lugo wrote: On 10/23/2014 12:05 AM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: systemd is a tool designed to get the system to a state where "real work" can be done. NTP servers, DHCP clients, consoles, aren't the real work of a system, or at least I hope not, because that would be boring to me. Depends

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote: > > Re. NTP: Timekeeping is rather essential in lots of applications - like, for > example, transit operations, where I currently spend my work life. An > accurate, accessible central clock tends to be a rather important system > component.

Re: Self destruction in open source systems (was Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT])

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:58 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote: > > Now I have Thunderbird and Firefox--from people who are committed to the > notion that if it works, it must be replaced. If people like it, it must > be redesigned. If it is stable, it must be updated. If there is a > useless, senseless

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

Hey... how about not using selective editing to change the thread of discussion (see below) Jeffrey Ollie wrote: On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote: Re. NTP: Timekeeping is rather essential in lots of applications - like, for example, transit operations, where I currently s

Re: Self destruction in open source systems (was Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT])

Joe Hamelin wrote: On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:58 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote: Now I have Thunderbird and Firefox--from people who are committed to the notion that if it works, it must be replaced. If people like it, it must be redesigned. If it is stable, it must be updated. If there is a useles

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 20:45:01 -0500, Jeffrey Ollie said: > As I've already said a couple of times, systemd does not force a > particular NTP implementation on you. It comes with one (timedated), > and has a utility to manage it (timedatectl) but the admin can install > and use a different one if t

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 9:08 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote: > Hey... how about not using selective editing to change the thread of > discussion (see below) > > If you're going to simply keep repeating "I like systemd, everything is > copacetic" - maybe you should take your fanboy attitude elsewhere, a

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Barry Shein wrote: [snip] > The unix community has exerted great amounts of effort over the > decades to speed up reboot, particularly after crashes but also > planned. Perhaps you don't remember the days when an fsck was > basically mandatory and could take 15-20

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 9:18 PM, wrote: > On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 20:45:01 -0500, Jeffrey Ollie said: > >> As I've already said a couple of times, systemd does not force a >> particular NTP implementation on you. It comes with one (timedated), >> and has a utility to manage it (timedatectl) but the

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On Wed, 22 Oct 2014, Miles Fidelman wrote: And maybe, you should check out some of the upstream bug reports re. systemd interactions with NTP. If you think the current situation is all good then maybe you should look at other bugs for ntp. eg this one I that affected me with Ubuntu Disktop. T

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 9:48 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote: > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Barry Shein wrote: >> And you whisk all that away with "it's not really clear to me that >> 'reboots in seconds' is a think to be optimized" > > False dilemma. > [ snip ] > 10 seconds from power on to user i

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 09:48:51PM -0500, Jimmy Hess wrote: > Optimizing reboot time down from 20 minutes to 1 minute is a > significantly meaningful improvement; it's literally a 85% reduction > in time spent during each boot process from the original time. if reducing boot time from 20 minu

NTT high packet loss from US and BR to AU?

Anyone else notice this? Or is this an AWS issue in APAC that hasn't been reported yet? AU-NY(aws) 18. xe-1.level3.lsanca03.us.bb.gin.n 72.0% BR(aws)-AU(aws) 11. ae-9.r20.snjsca04.us.bb.gin.ntt.net 71.4% NJ/NYC to AU(aws) 9. ae-9.r20.asbnva02.us.bb.gin.ntt.net 45.9% 772 10.1 16.4 9.2 94.4 13.3

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

On 10/22/2014 23:02, Jim Mercer wrote: if reducing boot time from 20 minutes down to 1 minute, in a server environment, is a serious issue for you, maybe you should be looking at why you need to reboot so often? That is the question I have been asking myself. Back in the day we took it a a f

Re: NTT high packet loss from US and BR to AU?

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 12:34 AM, Javier J wrote: > from Newark, NJ > > 1. pfsense.home 0.0% 295 > 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.7 0.0 > 2. l100.nwrknj-vfttp-134.verizon-gni.net0.0% 294 > 1.1 8.7 0.9 297.7 31.3 > 3. g0-14-4-1.nw

Re: NTT high packet loss from US and BR to AU?

Does it actually persist to your destination? Loss in transit paths is simply ICMP de-prioritization unless it's losing packets all the way to the last hop. On 10/23/2014 午後 01:18, Javier J wrote: Anyone else notice this? Or is this an AWS issue in APAC that hasn't been reported yet? AU-NY(

Re: NTT high packet loss from US and BR to AU?

Do you see any other indications of performance problems? jms On Thu, 23 Oct 2014, Javier J wrote: Anyone else notice this? Or is this an AWS issue in APAC that hasn't been reported yet? AU-NY(aws) 18. xe-1.level3.lsanca03.us.bb.gin.n 72.0% BR(aws)-AU(aws) 11. ae-9.r20.snjsca04.us.bb.gin.nt

Re: NTT high packet loss from US and BR to AU?

So we have a nagios box in the environment in Sydney and everything is 100% ok. new relic kept loosing connectivity to 30 plus servers on and off. Guys from California can ssh in, some cant. AWS reports everything operating as normal. Guys from other parts of the world can and can't load web pa

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

On Wed, 22 Oct 2014, Larry Sheldon wrote: That is the question I have been asking myself. Back in the day we took it a a failure if a reboot happened. (I remember discussions about needing to reboot to keep counters from overflowing. I thought programming for counter wrap was a better idea.)

Re: NTT high packet loss from US and BR to AU?

Yup seeing the same. Following examples all show same loss pattern between ~ 3:30 and ~ 4:30 UTC: syd ntt - nyc ntt syd ntt - mia ntt syd ntt - cdg ntt (paris) syd ntt - ams ntt One example: http://i.imgur.com/TmCkd1B.png?1 Cheers, Andree .-- My secret spy satellite informs me that at 2014-1

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

Ok. As a highly on- list-topic example of why distrust is called for... Without referring to the systemd source code*, does anyone know what systemd uses to select between networking subsystems (i.e. NetworkManager, the new standard as of RHEL 7, vs /etc/ sysconfig/network-scripts/, etc.).

Re: NTT high packet loss from US and BR to AU?

Thank you Andree, This confirms it wasn't just us. I am curious if anyone knows what the issue was. I can't find anything on NTT website. On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 1:25 AM, Andree Toonk wrote: > Yup seeing the same. Following examples all show same loss pattern > between ~ 3:30 and ~ 4:30 UTC: >

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

On 10/22/14 9:29 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote: > On 10/22/2014 23:02, Jim Mercer wrote: > >> if reducing boot time from 20 minutes down to 1 minute, in a server >> environment, >> is a serious issue for you, maybe you should be looking at why you >> need to >> reboot so often? > > > That is the quest

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

On 10/22/2014 08:20 PM, Simon Lyall wrote: > On Wed, 22 Oct 2014, Miles Fidelman wrote: >> And maybe, you should check out some of the upstream bug reports re. >> systemd interactions with NTP. > > If you think the current situation is all good then maybe you should > look at other bugs for ntp. e

Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 12:28 AM, George Herbert wrote: > > Ok. As a highly on- list-topic example of why distrust is called for... > > Without referring to the systemd source code*, does anyone know what systemd > uses to select between networking subsystems (i.e. NetworkManager, the new > sta