No systemd discussion?

[D. Hugh Redelmeier]

| From: Lennart Sorensen <lsorense-1wCw9BSqJbv44Nm34jS7GywD8/FfD2ys at public.gmane.org>

| I think you completely misread what he wrote.

The link you gave is to a copy of what he wrote.  That copy was on an
edgy "forum".

Here's the original:
<http://www.landley.net/notes.html#23-04-2014>

    I firmly believe that the Linux community needs to derive a new
    workstation OS from Google's Android code the way BSD derived a new
    system from AT&T's Unix code. Clone the proprietary bits, install on
    the same hardware, provide our version as a series of upgrades to the
    preinstalled version where possible until we can get vendors to
    preinstall our version, and meanwhile be closely compatible with the
    existing preinstalled version that has the giant userbase.

So: he takes it as a given that GPL isn't acceptable.  Purely because
of Google's license.  I do the reverse: Google's code is unacceptable,
at least partly because of Google's license.

I admit that I don't know what the license clash is.  Likely an
end-user can install GPLed code, but distribution is forbidden in some
manner.

You might read some more from Rob's site.  See, for example,
<http://www.landley.net/toybox/oldlicense.html>
(He's certainly right about some things.)

According to Google, they won't accept GPL or LGPL code into AOSP
(except for the Linux kernel).  I don't yet see how that prevents me
creating an Android derivative that uses LGPL or GPL code.  The chance
of Google accepting outside code is minor anyway.
<https://source.android.com/source/licenses.html>
<https://source.android.com/source/faqs.html>

I guess that there might be different restrictions on programs Google
Play App Store.

|  I think he is trying
| to replace some of androids userspace and saying systemd can't do that
| because android says 'no gpl in userspace'.  But it is also possible I
| misread it.

I think that you've been intentionally misdirected.  Google's Android
won't adopt GPLed or LGPLed code except (one presumes reluctantly) for
the Kernel.  I doubt that they enforce this on downstream (eg. the
mythical Linux Desktop derived from Android Open Source Project).

And yet:
<http://lwn.net/Articles/478977/>

| He does a lot of work with embedded systems, including a lot of systems
| where systemd almost certainly would not fit.

No idea.  If it were done right (to my standards), systemd should fit.
But my standards aren't commonly met.

| I know he is not a fan of gcc or gnu make, and who can blame him. :)

He really doesn't like systemd, and who can blame him.

I generally accept many of his arguments but don't agree with his
weighting of them.

For more technical arguments against systemd (which I am not in a
technical position to confidently weight), see some entries in
<http://ewontfix.com/>
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists