Re: Avoiding SystemD isn't hard
On Tue 21 Oct 2014 at 15:01:18 -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 17:19:08 +0200
> Liam Proven <lproven@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > A blog post explaining why it isn't mandatory, the utter futility of
> > the fork and more besides, clearly and simply.
> >
> > http://www.vitavonni.de/blog/201410/2014102101-avoiding-systemd.html
>
> What I really like about the blog is that, almost from the beginning,
> the author lets us know his agenda with words like "trolls". And, just
> to make his point with his non-cognizant readers, he quotes Gregory
> Smith as just another "anti-systemd-troll", instead of as a guy all of
> the anti-systemd people have repudiated and disavowed all alliance with.
Have all the anti-systemd people repudiated Gregory? Here is one who
embraces him as part of the fold:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2014/10/msg00287.html
Gregory, please don't do this. It hurts the credibility of the entire
group who agrees with you 100% on the issues. There are enough *facts*
about systemd, Poettering, Sievers and Redhat to logically and
completely make your point.
The group "agrees with you 100% ....". Does that look like "repudiation"
and "disavowed all alliance with"?
It seems more like trying to get someone to toe the Party line.
Reply to: