Future and impact of ongoing projects in Linux world

[Xen]

Daniel Llewellyn schreef op 09-10-2016 21:43:
> On 09/10/16 20:35, Xen wrote:
>> Personally I think SystemD is lower level and in that sense more
>> dependable and more broad...ly available. It might not do the same
>> things but... at least it is something both parties could use.
> 
> Well, I would love a SystemD-based user-level mounting support as you
> suggest, the problem is that the BSD projects have all suggested that
> they will not or cannot implement anything SystemD, partly due to it's
> integral nature with the Linux kernel. Unfortunately this means that
> any implementation of user-mounting will either not work at all on BSD
> or will need to be independent of SystemD if you desire it to be
> accepted by BSD, which _may_ (I don't know for sure) be requisite for
> acceptance into Gnome and/or KDE..

I think it's still the only thing I can do myself.

I have never used BSD so it is no worry to me from the beginning at 
least, and I just want something that works for me, as well, I am sure 
you can understand that ;-).

I just believe that creating a model is foremost. If the model is right, 
the solutions will follow. What I mean is that if you create something 
that is modular enough, other people can recreate it. I know SystemD is 
not very modular in that sense... it is not like you can take many 
pieces out, right. I also object to some of their command line 
interfaces in that sense, but... you know, you can't always have 
everything the way you want and you sometimes just have to go with what 
is available and what is functional and achievable, you know.

I don't really even know what BSD has to do with a user-level GUI, 
but...

I'm not aware of BSD being more popular than 1% of Linux? I could be 
wrong...

Sometimes you just have to create something that works and if the model 
is right you can expand it to something else...

The autofs developer... has also not been unkind... to me, but autofs 
regularly failed for me while using it so I stepped away from it. And 
that leaves libpam_mount which works reasonably well albeit a bit rough. 
So you see, I have been around a bit :p.

Even discovered a smb mounting bug (or limitation) in which having the 
same hashed password for different users creates a problem (if the 
usernames are identical, but the domains aren't). If you want to know 
what I've been doing... I've just been patching smb to have a new option 
for mounting that works with my system... so I am just doing 
groundwork... not anything big in that sense...

Sorry about that, you know. But the big things can wait until the 
smaller pieces are in place, I feel. One can perform a hundred smaller 
operations in the same time it would take to take on 1 big project. Even 
much more than that...

So we do the groundwork first, is what we do.

Regards ;-).