On 10/20/2014 at 01:50 PM, Axel Wagner wrote: > Hi Thorsten, > > Thorsten Glaser <tg@mirbsd.de> writes: >> >>> "If you don't want to use my software on general principles, go >>> away and write your own. Do not bother me." >>> >>> This principle is hardly specific to systemd. >> >> Yes, but other upstreams at least agree to not step on the toes of >> people who wish to use other software. > > Can you give an example of people doing that in case of systemd? > Because so far, everything I heard was similar to GNOME, where: > • systemd provided a feature. This is the problem. The init system should not be providing "features" which other software might, post-boot and pre-shutdown, want to make use of. (AFAIK sysvinit never did, and most - possibly all? - of the other init-system candidates don't either.) Such features should be provided separately, independent of what may happen to be running as PID 1. The decision to incorporate such features into systemd is IMO the design flaw which leads to the problems to which people object. That decision was made by the systemd developers, and is the core reason why blaming systemd upstream for the problems that result from > • Software A's upstream decided they wanted to use it, because it made > their life easier. is arguably (but IMO often) legitimate. -- The Wanderer The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature