[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: systemd requires "plymouth" on server? (was: Systemd: no error but "maintenance mode")



On Tue 10 Jan 2017 at 20:54:50 (+0100), Steffen Dettmer wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 1:01 AM, Michael Biebl <biebl@debian.org> wrote:
> >>> I'd rather keep it as simple as possible
> >>
> >> you can still use sysvinit as init
> 
> I read that trying to use sysvinit causes trouble and several things
> depend on systemd at the moment.

You can read almost any opinion you like on the web about sysvinit and
systemd. Many of them are wrong.

> > The shell scripts used by sysvinit are not simpler. More familiar maybe,
        ↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑
> > but not simpler.
> 
> Simplicity can very roughly approximated by source code size.
> Do you think the systemd implementation of the fsck wrapper
> is simpler that "fsck -A"?

Not a fair comparison.

Sysvinit and systemd are just two init systems amongst many,
and they take very different approaches. You can use either
in Debian so please stop complaining.

> I hope GNU/Linux forks off as soon as systemd integrates an own
> kernel (systemk) and its reimplementation of Wayland (systemx)
> in one binary image blob, which for technical reasons will
> temporarily be called \EFI\BOOT\BOOTx64.EFI, but only until
> UEFI BIOS functionalities are fully integrated. Then you can POST
> and fsck in parallel, write units that depend on POST (so X won't
> start before POST passed! Imagine that!!) to form a clean, simple
> and modern-to-the-max system.
> 
> SCNR :-)

Cheap. People here are trying to help, and you troll.

Cheers,
David.


Reply to: