Action, inaction, and over-the-top
On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 15:51:29 +0200
berenger.morel@neutralite.org wrote:
> Le 06.10.2014 13:17, Gregory Smith a écrit :
> > What is needed is inaction,
>
> Huh.... I'm not a systemd lover, you know, but what you just wrote is
> weird!
> Seriously, I have so many problems at work because people never even
> tries to make code more readable, more secured, because "inaction is
> better". Systemd is excessive, yes. But inaction is never a good
> thing, no software is finished.
First of all, I make no excuse for the *manner* in which the OP
expressed his opinion, and am responding only to your assertion that
"inaction is never good"...
Permanent inaction is, of course, just as you say, never good. But
action for action's sake is never good either, and sometimes, facing a
situation where you don't *yet* see a good alternative, inaction
combined with further study is the best way to go.
> Then, why not forking whatever was fine for you, and stop annoying
> people?
Really think about what you say in the preceding sentence. Think of it
in terms Jessie. With numerous important and downright vital programs
now gratuitously depending on systemd, how is he going to fork it?
Sure, he can probably use a lightweight init (nosh comes to mind), and
in Wheezy all he'd have to do is make the controllers for every daemon,
and those controllers are a lot simpler than sysvinit scripts.
But in Jessie, with apps and even authentication depending on systemd,
about all he could do is get to a command prompt (if he can figure a
way to authenticate). Systemd made forking one or two orders of
magnitude more difficult.
> Stop infringing the rules of this mailing list (because, I
> really doubt that insulting people is allowed)?
Agreed. Too nasty and over the top. In my opinion systemd leaves enough
room for mockery to make your point without swearwords or extreme
incivility.
SteveT
Steve Litt * http://www.troubleshooters.com/
Troubleshooting Training * Human Performance
Reply to: