Re: systemd is here to stay, get over it now
Hi,
Thorsten Glaser:
> systemd is a backdoor in that, like the availability of Steam
> games for DDs, it has a chance to hinder the progress of all
> projects done in the spare time of the people affected.
>
Yeah. It "has a chance".
It also "has a chance" to give people a big chunk of spare time back,
because they can find and fix their daemon startup bugs a whole lot
faster (and more consistently) than with SysVinit.
Your chance is pure speculation. My chance is personal experience.
> systemd is a backdoor in that, by means of vendor lock-in
Which vendor are you talking about, exactly?
> any more, to which people could switch in case of a fatal emergency
> with the systemd-provided code.
>
I'd assume that switching from systemd to something_else in an emergency is
a whole lot easier than switching from Linux to something_else.
The solution to any grave bug will be, like with any piece of userland
software, to fix that bug and restart systemd. You can't do that with the
kernel yet (reboot required), yet I don't hear a lot of people complaining
about "vendor lock-in" by the Linux kernel.
> Yes, I just compared systemd to a drug. This feels strangely right
> in so many ways.
>
One might want to counter this "argument" by comparing systemd-bashing
to a drug. That feels also strangely right in many ways.
Again: You want diversity and a non-systemd Debian? Fine.
Then shut up and help with the work required to get there,
instead of complaining on -devel.
We have all heard the arguments. And the "arguments". Multiple times.
Enough said. I, for one, will now *plonk* this thread.
--
-- Matthias Urlichs
Reply to: