Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Apr 08, 2017 at 11:07:32AM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
> Le nonidi 19 germinal, an CCXXV, tomas@tuxteam.de a écrit :
> > So we always had multi-user: the trend is rather the other way:
> > since everyone has his/her own gadget, complex things like desktop
> > environments tend to do silly things spoiling the multi-user roots
> > of UNIX.
>
> We agree on that.
Yes, this was more an answer to Richard.
> > Note that I'm a decided systemd opponent, and that might shine
> > through the above. Feel free to correct any misrepresentation.
>
> I would not have guessed. But you forgot a very important information:
> what are you a PROponent of?
A more evolutionary approach. A de-boilerplating of SysV and perhaps
an outsourcing of process shepherding to something along the lines
of runit.
Definitely not a tightly coupled process set hooking into everything
from DBus to cgroups.
> With the SysV init system, the init program is stupid: it starts the
> master script that spawns all the individual init scripts, it reaps its
> children dutifully, but it does not keep track of anything beyond a
> single 3-bits piece information called "runlevel".
[...]
All the well-known arguments in favour of systemd. I know them by
heart, and this discussion has gone back and forth enough for all
of us. You know the counter-arguments as well as I know the pro
arguments, so I think it's no use in turning another round.
Perhaps we must accept that there are different philosophies here,
without hating each other :-)
regards
- -- tomás
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAljpRpkACgkQBcgs9XrR2kZpaACeNNLuitVVMbhY27fOik+KLBxe
764AnRJUKA+lPUgf/y5ASx6caCyd+3IA
=nhSQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: