On 04/17/2016 07:00 AM, Eike Lantzsch wrote:
Yeah, IMHO the emotionalism is anti-productive. I have my opinion and my reasons for said opinion, but when emotions become involved in the discussion, all real logical consideration of the merits of one system over another go out the door. We should really be trying to get the best system we can, whether with init or systemd, and that should be based on the merits of the two competing systems, not on opinion and emotion. Both systems work. Both systems have merit, and I acknowledge that my preference for init over systemd my well be due to ignorance than anything else.On Sunday 17 April 2016 11:48:16 Mark Fletcher wrote:On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 3:19 PM Michael Milliman < michael.e.milliman@gmail.com> wrote:I've never really liked systemd, though I must admit it does work and do the job -- I just like the simplicity of the init system better. Admittedly, I may well be undereducated on systemd resulting in my prejudice.Speaking of prejudice -- question to the list in general -- why the vitriol in the linux community about systemd? I read the "I'm changing distros because I don't like systemd" type blog posts, and the "Debian devs are evil for forcing systemd on us" and so on -- and then I tried it. I've even built a LFS system using it. I really, really can't see what the fuss is about. Yes, it's complicated, but then init was quite capable of confusing the living daylights out of me as well... It seems the emotions, even now, are running too high to be simply about "if it ain't broke don't fix it". What am I missing? MarkAll the pros and cons of system.d have been discussed and ranted about here and can be easily found in the archives. I personally don't think that it is necessary to go through those discussions again. Easily one can slip some emotional comment [sigh!] (sic) into a posting but it is unnecessary to jump on it - no?
All the best to y'all Eike
-- Mike