Re: Avoiding SystemD isn't hard
On 21/10/14 at 03:01pm, 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.
>
Each and everyone on this list is supposed to be a debian user with some knowledge
about debian history.
Instead, reading the tons of posts (ie spam) about systemd it seems like you all are
talking about something you don't know nothing about (how to purge a package and
switch to another in debian!?). For the ones that are not willing to
purge/install there's a patch waiting
Those posts are neverending stories where really weak assumptions are being raised
against systemd (casually immediately after Linus rails at Sievers because of
its debug "crap" with the /proc/cmdline).
Moreover, you jump in the ML every week with a different object but same
contents, summarized by: I do not know exactly why, but I don't want systemd to live
among the other 10000 debian packages and few other init systems just because Linus
pissed on Sievers and so do I on systemd which he - the Primadonna - wrote.
For that IMHO he's right when using the word "troll".
--
« Nunc est bibendum, nunc pede libero pulsanda tellus »
Reply to: