On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 11:37:48PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le jeudi 21 juillet 2011 à 20:01 +0200, Stephan Seitz a écrit : So, since you don’t need it, other people don’t need it either?
No, since I don’t need it, I don’t want to be forced to use it.
You know, there are some who just want to use their server or desktop, not to spend their time editing files to tune boot ordering.
Bullshit. I don’t know any user or administrator of servers or desktops who have network conditions changing so fast that they often need to change network configuration files. Notebook users are different when they often change their locations, but they can use Network Manager if they want (I don’t need it for my notebook). In fact, NM gets pulled in anyway when you install gnome, so you don’t need to manually install it.
I don’t care if systemd is part of Debian, so you can choose to install it, like you can choose between sysklogd, syslog-ng and rsyslog. But I don’t think it is worth to replace sysvinit.That’s utter bullshit. There is ZERO point in being able to choose between several init systems. If the technology allows it, it’s fine to
Well, in the end there is ZERO point in chosing between different desktop manager or text editors. You are only confusing users.
road to disaster. Users expect one init system that works fine, not 3 with different sets of flaws.
And sysvinit is working fine. I never had a system not booting because of sysvinit.
Shade and sweet water! Stephan -- | Stephan Seitz E-Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org | | PGP Public Keys: http://fsing.rootsland.net/~stse/pgp.html |
Description: Digital signature