On 12/08/2014 at 09:15 AM, Brian wrote:
> On Mon 08 Dec 2014 at 08:31:57 -0500, The Wanderer wrote:
>
>> On 12/08/2014 at 06:41 AM, Martin Read wrote:
>>> There is *no legitimate basis* for arguing with the OP's
>>> complaint. The systemd transition has caused a user interface
>>> regression, which should be fixed.
>>>
>>> I like systemd, but I do wish certain of its non-coding
>>> proponents would stop indulging in incendiary defence of it
>>> against legitimate complaints.
>>
>> Exactly. It's at least as bad as the people who blame systemd for
>> everything that they see go wrong after the changeover.
>
> Sorry, I see no "defence" ("incendiary" or otherwise) of any init
> system being made in this thread. What I do see is people trying to
> help with a solution to a problem. One by Curt is referenced above.
> By all means criticise it but to see something like that as some some
> sort "proponent" argument is not warranted.
This thread is about complaints about not being able to interrupt /
abort / cancel an already-started boot-time fsck.
Several people in this thread (including, I think, you?) are responding
to those complaints by saying "It's your own fault, for not doing X",
rather than by saying "Yes, it's systemd's fault, for not doing /
letting you do Y".
I.e., they're turning a criticism of systemd around into an attack on
the criticizers.
That is, as indicated, a defense of systemd - and one of a sort which is
likely to fan the flames of dispute, rather than letting them cool.
--
The Wanderer
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature