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

Re: I'm not a huge fan of systemd

On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 9:15 PM, Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> On Mon 07 Jul 2014 at 09:46:22 +0900, Joel Rees wrote:
>> Doubting the veracity of information you are given is one of the
>> responsibilities you accept when you start thinking for yourself.
> Thinking doesn't stop at doubting.

But just because thinking continues long enough to see things one
doesn't like in your brand of the next best thing since sliced bread,
and stops before digging deep in, doesn't mean it isn't thinking.

>> Calling a peson's choice about how he spends his time "dubious grounds" is
>> one of the principle tools of tyranny. Even parents trying to help children
>> understand they are the root cause of their own problems should avoid using
>> such arguments.
> The basis for the original doubt appeared to be the list of systemd's
> core components; the technical point that journald can be disabled was
> ignored. It was the reasoning I found dubious.

    "You had the time on similar dubious grounds
     to doubt the veracity of the information you were given."

> Erwan David has my apologies if what was said came through as dictating
> how to spend his time.

You basically insulted anyone who dared to point out that many
thinking, experienced engineers have said they would not have chosen
the particular modularization that the systemd engineers have chosen.

Yeah. Lists of components cannot be chosen arbitrarily. They reflect
and expose the design.

>> And your response is a prime example of the reason systemd advocates are
>> seen as more than pushy.
> If giving a technical answer to a technical question ("Can you run
> systemd without logind or journald?") is seen as advocacy we are in a
> bad way.

Do you really think you answered his question? Even the part you quoted here?

The way I saw this part of the conversation, there was concern
expressed that logs would not exist for humans without being first
passed off to a separate daemon. One that could not easily be
replaced. And you said that, when that logging daemon was up and
running in your configuration, the logs made it to the disk. And he
said you had not addressed his concerns and then you insulted his lack
of interest in your anecdotes.

(Sorry to be doing the he-said, he-said with your words, Erwan.)

So, your setup works for you. And therefore we should all quit
complaining, ignore the concerns that experience has taught us, and
just dig into your chosen brand of the next best thing since sliced

Joel Rees

Be careful where you see conspiracy.
Look first in your own heart.

Reply to: