Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 09:20:44 +0900
Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> wrote:
> You grow up. Technically inferior stuff always seems to get the money,
> but you get to live in the results of your choices.
On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 19:00:40 -0600
yaro@marupa.net wrote:
> > > Doesn't make the decision to drop SysV Init, a system even its own
> > > maintainer says is a pile of garbage, in favor of systemd, any less
> > > technically sound.
> > flame away, flame away
> >
>
> Call it a flame all you want, but it's still deprecated and it's not for no
> reason Linux distributors are trying to get as far away from SysV as possible.
> And no, that reason isn't "Red Hat is trying to take over." Try actually
> researching the actual technical reasons systemd exists for once. They are
> almost innumerable.
Please look at what technical superiority of systemd consists of and then tell us if an ordinary user needs it. What systemd brings is something usefull only for companies that has money to pay for high-end servers, clusters, supercomputers and can get a clue who may some of them be. For ordinary users and even enterprises, it can be really called useless because with much less lines of code all of that could have been implemented on top of sysvinit and shell scripts. We simpy must separate ordinary users from mega-users because their interests are simply totally different. If mega-users want to use systemd and other mega-software let them, but let ordinary users use what suits them as well.
On Sun, 02 Mar 2014 12:30:57 -0600
yaro@marupa.net wrote:
> I responded with technical reasons. Shortsightedness has nothing to do with
> it. The fact you disagree with it and call it a flame doesn't make my reasons
> any less technical. You still haven't listed one TECHNICAL reason why systemd
> is a bad idea.
On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 19:00:40 -0600
yaro@marupa.net wrote:
> Oh, how will I ever live with a faster boot, more reliable process control,
> unit files that are easier to write and maintain than initscripts, socket-
> activated daemons, concurrently-launched dependency-based service startup, the
> fact that I use Archlinux and it actually went FROM a BSD-style init TO
> systemd, a logger I can actually efficiently navigate with metadata, and a more
> unified device and configuration infrastructure?
>
> Life is so horrible for me thanks to how easy systemd makes maintaining my
> system. I have seen the light!
I'm sure you could find a way to use your computer without software like systemd. You will save some time, but you will lose your freedom. Bad trade for my preference. BTW, that's what Windows is doing.
Reply to: