On Sun, 17 Apr 2016, Michael Milliman wrote:
On 04/16/2016 07:52 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
choice of inits as a standard option during installs on future
releases, but I very much doubt it.
B
I use Linux Mint on one of my machines. It is init based, not
systemd, and has Debian and Ubuntu as it's underpinnings. All of the
familiar things work great (apt, and all other packages I have used
under straight Debian). I think you might like that distribution as
well. You can check out their home page at
https://www.linuxmint.com. I still have Debian running on my server
system (Jessie with systemd), but I really like the Linux Mint system
with init as well. 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.
I'm evaluating a standard install of Mint (XFCE) running in VirtualBox.
No problems. And right, it uses Upstart as the init, but still has
systemd files everywhere. For dependency issues, I'm sure. However,
I've yet to check if I can do a minimal terminal install, and build off
it with just X, a window manager, and a panel. I like my system
kept small and light -- no extraneous crap like you get and never use,
and can't uninstall due to dependencies of the desktop environment.
My objection to systemd is philosophical: It's contrary to the Unix
credo of simplicity, an OS busybody as it were.
B