Once you go mini...

[ibi sum]

> 
> http://0pointer.net/blog/revisiting-how-we-put-together-linux-systems.html
> 

This kills the Unix.

http://ewontfix.com/14/



> What do you think Mint is doing a better job at?


Making an out-of-the-box distro that ‘just works’ upon installation without much tweaking, yet still continues to offer all the power and privilege that a modern Linux distribution has to offer.

I dunno, I’m not seeing much more that RH does though.  Perhaps its time I booted CentOS and all the other RedHat Things, and had a closer look.


> It's basically a different release process of Debian/Ubuntu, with different opinions around including proprietary software.
> 

I guess if you don’t like Debian/Ubuntu, its a moot argument.


> They do work in userland, but other than Cinnamon, I don't see anything they've done that substantially pushes Linux forward.

Cinnamon is no small thing!  But I think you’re into the ‘rewrite all the inits’ stage of this argument, which I haven’t quite agreed is a necessity at this point. systemd is flawed from the outset.  Putting all that crap into init1?  Fuck, its just not cricket, man ..


> I'm genuinely not trolling, although I realize it looks just like I am :) I think systemd is exactly the right kind of disruptive change that needs to happen to Linux, particularly in the world of


If by disruptive you mean “introduces countless headaches for anyone who has admin’ed a Linux system up to this point, is not at all secure even in the slightest bit, and doesn’t actually *add* features but rather takes them away”, I guess you have a point.


> 
> As a desktop OS only it's not as bad, but Ubuntu Server LTS has many issues.


Okay, on this I think you have a fair and valid point, but then I don’t think that server problems should be solved by distributions, a technique which only makes sense with desktops (imho), but rather the server install problem should be solved by competent individual server administrators - who are given good tools to solve this problem..  Tools like RancherOS, which is too new school I admit, but still, RancherOS is everything a good server distribution should be: absolutely bare-bones enough to run Docker containers, and thats *it*.  That is to say, I don’t think “collective distribution maintained by the mob” is the right way to approach server-distribution politics.  Well, maybe my mind isn’t settled yet, but I’d love to know what is a ‘good server OS’ out of all the distro’s out there - besides RancherOS, that is ..

> 
> For one or two machines, sure, and for orchestration sure. Not for actual config management :)


Why can’t you do CM with Ansible, but you can with Puppet?  Oh, I know .. because client-server.  Yuck!  YUCK!  BTW, doesn’t scale.  Oh wait, yes it does: if you put your manifests in git and then checkout with ssh on all/multiples-of the recipients, but then you’ve just re-invented Ansible and may as well just use it, coz YAML and stuff.

/ducks


> (For those who don't know, I work at Puppet Labs :) )


You’re the freakin’ Puppet God, we know it.  :)


And I’m really only baiting you into explaining all the things I don’t know about Puppet because I’ve been using Ansible for the last year and therefore haven’t caught up with how super-duper Puppet has become, lately .. I’m prepared to be enlightened, but probably I should just go watch a hipstercast on the subject and get my ass kicked into the 21st Century, somehow.  Because “python all the things”, right?



;
--
Jay Vaughan
ibisum at gmail.com

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.music-bar.org/pipermail/music-bar/attachments/20150225/9a3974ce/attachment.pgp>