Re: (forw) [DNG] Linux system can be brought down by sending SIGILL to Systemd

Quoting Sarah Newman ([email protected]):

> Anyone have opinions on whether Devuan worth it compared to just
> removing systemd? We make Debian images without systemd (except for
> udev, udev is still systemd) and they work.

Yes.

I actually have a very flexible notion of 'Debian' in practice, because
long ago I arrived at the opinion that the best way to build a Debian
system is to start with an ISO that isn't from Debian Project.  At one
point, I created an entire Web page to document how and why.
'Installers' on http://linuxmafia.com/kb/Debian/ 

You'll notice that that page has become moldy since 2007 when I last did
a major update, and as 2019 practical advice it would be probably on
balance somewhere between 90% useless and outright unwise (and at a
glance I see at least one statement of fact that was defensible then but
is pretty much wrong now).  But that's not the point.  The point is
that, between the lines, I was saying that the most desirable way to
create a Debian system is almost never a Debian ISO.

Around then, my go-to way of installing Debian would have been one of
the unoffical not-from-Debian installable live-CD ISOs mentioned.  _Or_
use the Debian netinst tiny-iSO.  

Shortly after I most-recently updated that page, my view became that
Debian-stable was no longer of interest to me at all, its limitations
and trailing-edge qualities being too annoying, and I found that the
best IMO way of creating a Debian-testing/unstable system -- my
preference since then, was with Aptosid.  Aptosid was a live-CD ISO in
several DE flavours (including no DE) that was highly compatible with
Sid/unstable but leveraged Aptosid-managed third-party apt repos after
installation, the purpose of which was to further stabilise sid/unstable's
software on an ongoing basis.  The several Aptosid DE-flavour ISOs were
released quarterly.  The project was active for many years.  Today, what
survives of it is a schism project, Siduction, which I recommend to your
attention if you're curious.

Like the unofficial ISOs highlighted on my old crufty page, part of the
point of the Aptosid (and Siduction) images is to have much, much
better installer-time hardware support than in Official Debian, such
that you never again encountered those infamous 'Official Debian doesn't
like my crappy-yet-new Broadcom NIC' roadblocks.

And, sneaking up on my point, after long experience with all of these
not-necessarily-entirely-Official-Debian ways of getting Debian going,
and not-necessarily[...] administrative regimens thereafter, I realised
I really couldn't care less whether the Debian Project Leader would
agree that a system I made/ran was orthodox Debian, if only because some
Debian Project policies and packaging decisions always struck me as
pinheaded all along, and that what I was _really_ doing was debianesque 
construction and system administration, but then calling the result
'Debian', because I was treating Debian as a system style of
construction and operation rather than something defined and owned by
Debian Project.

And that's where I've landed.  If constructing a Debian system tomorrow,
I'd start with the Devuan 2.0 'Ascii' ISO or maybe with the Refracta one
(Refracta being a closely related-to-Devuan live-ISO project, roughly
related to Devuan the way Aptosid/Siduction is to Debian.  At the end of
installer run, I would extensively tweak, e.g., purge SysVInit and
replace it with either OpenRC or s6, because either is MoreBetter IMO.
I wouldn't leave the system exactly the way Devuan Project defaults
leave it, any more than I'd leave it the way Debian Project does  Why?
Because it's my system, not theirs.

If asked what kind of system that is, I'd definitely say 'Debian'.  If
then asked 'Isn't that Devuan?',  I'd say 'Sure, I guess, but I prefer
to think of it as Debian as implemented by Devuan Project and then by
Rick Moen system administration.'

Anyway, in case it is not apparent, Devuan Project is about 90%
literally Debian, because it uses Debian Project repos as the basic
sets, but then supplements those with Devuan Project repos.  That's part
of the reason I think of systems built using their (or Refracta's)
installers as 'Debian':  because it's basically regular Debian, except
with override of a few pinheaded Debian Project policies and practices.

You might want to just try Devuan 2.0 'Ascii', and/or Refracta.  Kick it
around.

I hope that helps.