Re: Let's have a vote!
On 28/09/14 04:49, lee wrote:
> Scott Ferguson <scott.ferguson.debian.user@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On 26/09/14 07:34, lee wrote:
>>> Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> writes:
>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 03:04:24PM +0200, lee wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Systemd can handle the boot process from head to toe,
>>>>>> without needing to use any of the existing shell scripts.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's how systemd makes the boot process cryptic and
>>>>> non-debuggable.
>>>>
>>>> If you can understand start-stop-daemon, I'm sure systemd isn't
>>>> much harder.
>>>
>>> I never needed to understand it.
>>
>> Noted. (and adequately demonstrated that you don't understand it -
>> it "just works for you" - like systemd does).
>
> It works only as long as it does.
Insightful.
> I've seen how difficult it is to do a very simple thing with
> systemd,
Do you have a constructive example - or is the wingeRUS list? I'm
presuming you wish to improve the situation?
> how poor the documentation is
Obviously that is something that needs improving then. You could help by
stating the areas you find lacking - perhaps even tell us a bit about
where you looked? I'm not a real slow reader but even so I've found all
those man files a bit of a chore to read - it's going to take me a long
time to "get my head around it" (it's hard being old).
> and how confused the developers are.
Are they? Which developers? This a lot of information to take on board!
> When systemd fails, chance to fix it are as good as non-existent.
Ipso facto??
>
>>>>>> Systemd unit files, unlike SysV scripts, can usually be
>>>>>> shipped by upstream, or at least shared with other
>>>>>> distributions (already more than 1000 existing unit files
>>>>>> in Fedora) without any changes, the Debian specifics being
>>>>>> handled by systemd itself.
>>>>>
>>>>> So Debian even has its own version of systemd to make things
>>>>> more complicated.
>>>>
>>>> Debian has it's own idiosyncrasies of sysvinit, so this is a
>>>> point to neither side.
>>>
>>> They are simple scripts which are easy to understand.
>>
>> Either you understand it or you don't. Pick one. It's an approach
>> that may lead to principles and credibility (at the possible cost
>> of self-righteousness - bonus!).
>
> What are you trying to say? Something like "It doesn't matter when
> you write everything in Japanese because someone either understands
> it or not."?
Does it? How very interesting.
>
>>>> Users DO get a vote. Every time you download an ISO for debian,
>>>> that's a vote. Every time you install a system as debian,
>>>> that's a vote.
>>>
>>> It would be a vote nobody knows or cares about.
>>
>>
>> It's a personal choice. If you require a crowd of support as moral
>> justification you're doing it wrong.
>
> Just ask yourself: Why would someone choose to download an ISO for
> Debian?
I'm not sure how that is an answer to the question I asked. Would you be
so kind as to answer my question please?
The answer to your random question is - because they wish install
Debian. Please start a new thread for new questions.
>
>>>> As has been mentioned several times on this list, the best way
>>>> to get systemd out of debian is to develop an init system that
>>>> is technically superior to systemd. [...]
>>>
>>> There seems to be quite some disagreement about systemds'
>>> technical superiority.
>>>
>>>> When your new init system is ready for show time, either submit
>>>> it to debian (if you'd like debian to lead the way) or create
>>>> your own distribution to showcase the init system. Let people
>>>> see the ease with which your new system tackles the problems of
>>>> both sysvinit and systemd. Let them play with it and marvel at
>>>> the clean, robust code.
>>>>
>>>> We look forward to the fruits of your efforts!
>>>
>>> That'll be a long wait. Even if I made another init system, it
>>> would be ignored like everything else.
>>
>> Circular logic much? And it justifies what? Others doing the work
>> for you - on the basis that you've previously *alleged* your "work"
>> was unfairly rejected in the past. If 'it' is Open Source, not
>> some hypocritical SLitt license, then provide a link and let the
>> code speak for itself.
>
> It gives me reason not to waste my time with making software for
> others.
Your call, obviously.
> There are other reasons to do it, and I might give out what I make
> as open source or keep it for myself. That's probably along the
> lines of what most people do.
Whatever.
>
> If you want a link,
Please do - I'm open to trying other init systems.
I've posted one in another thread earlier today.
> Perhaps you want to play some sort of childish game here about who
> made the most software, so what software did you make?
>
> Or perhaps you don't realise that you got things the wrong way
> round.
Clearly not. (I can be a bit thick).
Kind regards
Reply to: