Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 10:28:34PM +0800, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> I'm tired of these changes that don't solve any problems. Half-baked
> stuff that is deployed before it is even feature-complete with the
> boring old stuff it is supposed to replace. How would you feel about a
> forced upgrade of apt to yum? After all newer is better ...
Comparing apples and oranges here. You cannot "upgrade" apt to yum
because yum is feature-wise very much comparable to apt. systemd,
OTOH, brings many new useful features you simply can't have with any
other init system. Period.
> > systemd is a good
> > design and most people actually agree otherwise it wouldn't become
> > standard on so many distributions (except Ubuntu, but that's rather a
> > political decision IMHO).
> It does have some good ideas, and it is better than the random bits of
> unmaintained shell it replaces - but it's mediocre at best. No real
> design, just things nailed together with screws and secured with tape.
Which just shows that you probably never seriously dug into
systemd. systemd has a very sensible and mature concept as opposed to
the very hacky System V Init where every distribution has to provide
their *own* init scripts (which clearly shows there is no concept) and
lots of modern functionatity is simply missing.
> > One of the Arch developers actually made a couple of good points why
> > they switched to systemd as default .
> Their users really appreciate it, especially those that are now
> migrating to other distros because they preferred their OS when it was
> booting as intended.
Stating from the thread in the Arch forums which I have posted, I
would say that this is simply untrue. People aren't going away from
Arch because of systemd. There are some who are unhappy with it, sure,
but most Arch users support the systemd switch or simply don't care
because they only want their init system to be fast and reliable which
truly is what systemd provides.