Re: Systemd: follow-up
Cognitive dissonance?
On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 7:24 AM, PaulNM <debian@paulscrap.com> wrote:
> Hi, please reply to the list as I am subscribed.
>
> On 08/07/2014 05:56 PM, Johann Spies wrote:
>> For the sake of clarity: The failure to boot was on the dist-upgraded
>> system and was due to systemd.sysfs. I will not repeat what I said in my
>> previous thread about this (see 'Systemd waisted 5 hours of my time').
>>
>> My installation of stable was exactly to escape the nightmares of
>> systemd.sysfs which caused every computer on which it was installed so
>> far not to be able to boot - not even in single user mode.
>>
>> As stable did not work out in this case, I tried with the clean
>> installation to upgrade to testing to see whether I could use systemd
>> without the previous problems, but the problems repeated itself.
>>
>> And I never said systemd was a problem on Wheezy. Read my email more
>> thoroughly please.
>
> I did read your email thoroughly. While it's true you didn't explicitly
> state you believed systemd caused issues on the stable install, it was
> strongly implied by the subject line and your final statement of "I
> would like to return to Debian when the systemd problems are sorted
> out.". At least two other people were under that impression as well.
>
> Also, I didn't want to assume you knew much about systemd. There's a
> bunch of misunderstanding about it going around at the moment, and there
> have been a few emails lately where systemd was blamed for issues it has
> nothing to do with. For all I knew, you could very well have been
> someone new to Linux/Debian and misunderstood what was happening. We're
> just trying to help.
?
--
Joel Rees
Be careful where you see conspiracy.
Look first in your own heart.
Reply to: