[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: OT: complaints about systemd



What I would like to stress is that systemd is practically incompatible and a great annoyance for both Hurd and kfreeBSD. OpenRC IMHO always seemed a better replacement for the traditional init. My 2 cents.

On Oct 10, 2014 5:15 PM, "Jason Young" <doomcup@gmail.com> wrote:
Normally I'm content to lurk and read things that happen on this mailing list, but what Michael here has linked has me where I just have to respond.

If this is what the systemd people wanted in the first place, then everything that has come before seems to be a deception. In the guise of solving init problems, they mean to start a process that would end Linux as we know it.

At this point, it's a different OS, and one that seems to be a whole lot of work for seemingly not much of a result. I'm honestly having a hard time wrapping my head around just what they're trying to do with this. With all these multiple versions of distros and DEs and such, it seems to me this is just setting up for even more bugs, user headaches, and huge amounts of wasted hard drive space.

I'd like to think that were this forwarded to various distro heads, they'd drop systemd like the plague and invest in something like OpenRC, but I'm not very optimistic about that anymore.

On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Michael <codejodler@gmx.ch> wrote:

Speaking about exchanging complexity...
http://0pointer.net/blog/revisiting-how-we-put-together-linux-systems.html (busy start with chapter 'User')

All that under the hood of 'systemd' just appears like a trojan horse. They should've called it DLL (Distributors-Less Linux) in the first place.

And yes, they're gonna replace Login and the Linux VT console too :) just about anything.



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-amd64-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20141010151905.2c679834@mirrors.kernel.org" target="_blank">https://lists.debian.org/20141010151905.2c679834@mirrors.kernel.org



Reply to: