CentOS - Apr 2015 - Problems with getty and X on runlevel switch [Was: Re: The future of centos]

100% with Digimer here.

I think there are no conspiracy theories. IMO RedHat does not want nor does it
afford to mess up CentOS.

All this energy should be put into contributing towards to the project, testing,
helping out community.

Lucian

--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!

Nux!
www.nux.ro

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Digimer" <lists at alteeve.ca>
> To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org>
> Sent: Saturday, 4 April, 2015 02:27:53
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] The future of centos
> On 03/04/15 09:01 PM, Francis Gerund wrote:
>> Almost everyone here has probably read this by now. If so, move along,
>> nothing new here.  But just in case you haven't, please take the
time to
>> read this.
>> 
>> Here it is, in their own words:  what Redhat thinks of Centos, and
it's
>> plans for the future of Centos.
>> 
>> Can you read between the lines?  In this case, it isn't very hard
to do,
>> IMHO.
>> 
>> community.redhat.com/centos-faq
> 
> How about you elaborate on your theory?
> 
> Publicly, and I believe honestly, Red Hat wanted to ensure the long-term
> health of the CentOS project. Many companies, when starting out, use
> CentOS because of it's enterprise lineage and free-as-in-beer cost.
> 
> Eventually, some of those companies will succeed and grow. Along the
> line, they will realize the value and ROI of switching to full
> enterprise support. Being on CentOS, it is then trivial for these
> companies to switch the RHEL proper.
> 
> There is no grand conspiracy here. It is very much in Red Hat's
> interests to keep CentOS healthy and thriving. Will CentOS change over
> time? Yes, of course. Every project, company (and people) need to change
> and adapt, or else they will fade into irrelevance.
> 
> --
> Digimer
> Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/
> What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without
> access to education?
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

On Sat, 2015-04-04 at 11:12 +0100, Nux! wrote:
> 100% with Digimer here.
> <snip>
> All this energy should be put into contributing towards to the project,
testing, helping out community.
Well, I used to agree. But when a bug report filed in December goes
untouched entering April, which I don't recall happening prior to RH
subsuming the project, it takes away impetus to ever file one again from
lowly end users like me I think.

http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=7972

Crashes related to 6.6 update involving the way init is done and X is
done seem, at least to me, serious enough to have warranted a look-see,
at least, if there is still real concern for the (desktop?) community.

Since I don't feel it's my place to tell others how to behave, this
(lack of) response has me now looking for alternatives that are (maybe?)
more reliable and responsive. Since I've transitioned to a user that
just wants a reliable tool now, the 6.6 upgrade soured me big-time. Then
having the bug report serve only to grow mold, rather than getting the
(apparent) conflict twixt init, X, the (new?) init processes ... looked
at is sealing my decision to find a more reliable desktop distribution.

Been UNIX (programming and user) since 1978, Linux since some early
Slackware distributions, CentOS since 4.x. Will now be looking for
something staying truer to the original UNIX concepts but full-featured
and stable - may not be available, but I've got to at least look. You
know, something that doesn't bomb on a point release update because
(inadequately tested/previewed and unnecessary/useless?) changes were
thrown in. Add in the extra instance of Firefox that hogs a 6-core AMD
processor (patch provided to the list earlier), stuff X-related running
and trying to contact the free desktop org folks w/o any notification
(shades of MS!), ... I can't speak for others, but changing much of
anything in the init processes and having extra instances of application
software started and running without user being ware (when these weren't
so common in the past?) seems significant and my thinking would be to
save those for better testing, possible RFCs, and major releases.

But I'm not a developer any more and don't expect the rigor I used to
apply still works in today's world.
> 
> Lucian
> <snip>
MHO, in (partial) ignorance,
Bill

>
> Well, I used to agree. But when a bug report filed in December goes
> untouched entering April, which I don't recall happening prior to RH
> subsuming the project, it takes away impetus to ever file one again from
> lowly end users like me I think.

It appears that you are the only one to have encountered this bug. Within
any project, open source or proprietary; problems are usually prioritized
according to the severity of the bug and the number of users that it
affects.

Le 04/04/2015 18:57, Bill Maltby (C4B) a ?crit :
> Been UNIX (programming and user) since 1978, Linux since some early
> Slackware distributions, CentOS since 4.x. Will now be looking for
> something staying truer to the original UNIX concepts but full-featured
> and stable - may not be available, but I've got to at least look.
I'm using Slackware and CentOS, and I'm happy with both. The former may 
be just what you are looking for. The bone-headed installer hasn't 
changed much since the early versions, building software from source is 
dead easy (without tossing a monkey wrench in the package manager), and 
everything JustWorks(tm). I have a few production servers and many 
desktop clients running Slackware, and I'm quite happy with it. I'm 
using CentOS for stuff that Slackware can't do (FreeIPA, etc.)

Cheers,

Niki

-- 
Microlinux - Solutions informatiques 100% Linux et logiciels libres
7, place de l'?glise - 30730 Montpezat
Web  : http://www.microlinux.fr
Mail : info at microlinux.fr
T?l. : 04 66 63 10 32

On 2015-04-04, Bill Maltby (C4B)
<centos4bill at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 2015-04-04 at 11:12 +0100, Nux! wrote:
>> 100% with Digimer here.  <snip>
>
>> All this energy should be put into contributing towards to the
>> project, testing, helping out community.
>
> Well, I used to agree. But when a bug report filed in December goes
> untouched entering April, which I don't recall happening prior to RH
> subsuming the project, it takes away impetus to ever file one again
> from lowly end users like me I think.
>
> http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=7972
Thanks for drawing my attention to that bug. I encountered it the other
day after switching from runlevel 5 to 3 (and back again) on a CentOS
6.6 machine.

The purpose of the runlevel switch was to restart gdm. Is there a better
way?

-- 

Liam