Re: Challenge to you: Voice your concerns regarding systemd upstream

[lee <lee@yagibdah.de>]

Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> writes:

>  Hi.
>
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 12:11:01AM +0200, lee wrote:
>> Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> writes:
>> 
>> > About the only thing that I'm missing here is why would anyone should
>> > compile anything on a production server, Xen's dom0 specifically (as it
>> > seems to be the main lee's concern).
>> 
>> I didn't have a server back then --- and software to run on my computer
>> which worked fine until some change was made and it suddenly didn't work
>> anymore. 
>
> Curious. Can you remember the name of this software?

yes

>> Package managers told me that the problem won't be fixed and
>> to install packages from experimental which wouldn't have solved the
>> problem and couldn't be installed without more or less upgrading my
>> system to experimental.  They call it "multiarch", I call it brokenarch.
>> IIRC, that was before current stable was relased, and there was no
>> chance that the problem would be fixed with the next stable release.
>
> The description is somewhat vague, and I can only assume that it was one
> of those funny packages contained i386 binaries marked as _amd64 arch.
> And you manage to hit an exact moment of transition from (in)famous
> ia32-libs blob to the multiarch. Painful, but those things don't happen
> in stable.

The problem hasn't been fixed in stable.  I'd have had to turn the
system into some sort of hybrid with all kinds of problems and would
have been better off with completely going back to a 32bit system, which
isn't an option.

> Ok, ok. We all got it already. S*stemd in Debian = bad. S*stemd in
> Fedora = good. Fedora has no xen, hence = bad. Debian has xen, hence =
> good.

Huh?  If you think like that, you are mistaken.


-- 
Hallowed are the Debians!