Is it time to split Linux into a split?

The focus of the controversy: the Systemd Inferno. A frequently discussed technology, a relatively simple controversy, is now being watched by every Linux enthusiast. If we are using SYSTEMD on all distributions, there will be little difference between the different distributions, except the Package Manager and the file system layout. Paul Venezia of InfoWorld wrote last week.

Without considering the possible changes in the development of a Linux desktop into a commercial pipeline, some companies will focus on desktop Linux, while others will focus on the Linux Server Edition, does this matter in itself meaningless?

The suggestion to split Linux in two quickly triggered another jousts in Slashdot, fortunately, Linux girl I have a fire cloak.

Some say it's okay.

"To some extent, I don't think there's much difference between Linux desktop and server editions," says Kevin O ' Brien, a Google + blogger. "Rhel is widely used in the server world, but few people use it on the desktop side. At the same time, few people use Linux Mint on the server side. "

"The great thing about Linux is that different distribution vendors can decide where their focus is, and now that's what they do, if someone says that Linux is not a good fit to run on the server, because it's not entirely server-specific." Then I want to ask, where are so many servers coming from now? "O ' Brien said.

The answer is: on the road

"The Linux distribution is already in the opposite direction, even though it's not really in the split," says Mike Stone, a Linux rants blogger. Some distributions focus on the server, some focus on workstations, they use different package managers, and even the cores used vary, "stone explained. "So, the reality is that Linux is now on the way to the split." "he said.

"There is a difference between the previous Ubuntu desktop version and the server version," Stone said. But this is not the case now, because the pay and returns are disproportionate, and today, the relationship between pay and return remains unchanged. ”

"If you think your desktop version of the server is not going to meet your needs, then it's time to switch to a server version of the system." ”

Linux has no advantage in Split

"I know he said that because he didn't like SYSTEMD, but the reality is that if using systemd is a bad idea, it's a bad idea whether it's on the desktop or the server. "Slashdot blogger and consultant Gerhard Mack said.

"I don't think this is a big deal, because many Linux system administrators do not care about how the system works, they only care about the system can work, so, ultimately, the system can work, not how the system works, this is the decision of a system in the user's heart status of the key factors." "Mack added.

"As for why Windows has server and desktop versions, the only reason is because the desktop version makes money, and the server version can." Linux is not the same, Linux is free, so it's not a good thing to split Linux into one. "Mack said.

What are the fears of division?

"Any division can also lead to fragmentation of efforts," said Google + blogger Alessandro Ebersol. "Those who push systemd do not understand a truth, that is, the force and the reaction is the same big." ”

"If those who support systemd are not so radical and do not require systemd to replace sysinit and upstart completely, there is no such thing as a voice against them, but these people have to make systemd the commanding heights and become the industry standard." ”

Multiple kernel support

There is a market for distributions that focus on a single point. Chris Travers said.

"These distributions will build their own systems for one server scenario and will be kernel-optimized, but they will still contain other packages because in those smaller deployments, the server rarely acts as a single role, and in a small enough deployment scenario, the server can even act as a workstation." "Travers explained.

"Now, those who have specific needs are often compiling their own kernels, but perhaps a release version that supports multiple cores is a better solution." Now, the Debian distribution has supported some distinctly different kernels, including Freebsd,linux and Hurd, which is a small step forward on the road to support multi-cores. ”

Everything is fine.

Soylentnews Bo Master Hairyfeet think of farther.

"Will you use an economy car to pull your mobile home?" Of course not, so now that you have only one operating system, will you force it to run on the desktop and the server? In that case, although all can run, but I dare say the system performance is absolutely not good. ”

"The server only needs a very basic VGA, the requirements of the graphics card is almost no, the same, on the sound card or anything else, on the server, all operations are I/O." The desktop and the server are the exact opposite, "Hairyfeet said.

"Two completely different roles need a system to complete, which is inherently unreasonable, so Linux should be split into two, which is obvious." ”

A stupid concept.

Robert Pogson's blogger said: "Dividing a system into client/server is a foolish idea, and separating the words is just doing some writing on the Api/protocols." There is absolutely no need to separate, now this is good. ”

He told Linux Girl,pogson that he was writing a small web application for him, and that "it would be foolish to be able to do what a machine would have done, and then it would take two machines to separate it." I want to use the Web app because I have some data, I have no high requirements for memory, and I don't want to write another GUI. ”

"I now use a database and a browser that will write a bit of code to exchange the data for both, which is an efficient way to use my time and resources." If I want to use a separate server in the future, no problem, I can turn on the server service. ”

In fact, those who say they should be divided into clients/servers have at least the following reasons: Security, license, contract. "The finer the things are, the more work needs to be done." If it's a big project, it's totally doable, but if it's a small project, it's completely unnecessary. The biggest benefit of gnu/linux is that I can create a server or client in a few seconds. ”

• Related articles recommended:
• Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.6 released
• A review of the development of Deepin Linux desktop environment
• Microsoft announces it loves Linux
• This article comes from: Hobby Linux
• This article link: http://www.ahlinux.com/news/9508.html

Is it time to split Linux into a split?