On 23/07/12 13:10, fredbezies wrote:
2012/7/23 Rodrigo Rivas <rodrigorivascosta@gmail.com>:
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 12:35 PM, 1126 <mailinglists@elfsechsundzwanzig.de>wrote:
For you this change might be a reason to switch to Fedora, you say. I mean, seriously? How is it all handled in Fedora then? Well, I don't now, actually.
Fedora is RedHat, and that's where systemd came to live, so you can guess...
I wrote the first message before I successfully done a setup with a minimal rc.conf
- It's a rolling release distro: You only have to carefully do pacman ./> -Syu to keep your system up-to-date. I started using Linux with Ubuntu and first I really looked forward to a new release, I mean new features, new artwork and all that stuff. But distupgrade nearly always failed and so I re-installed my system every six months. This is not good! With ArchLinux I can spent way more time just using my system instead of playing admin.
Well said. I came from Ubuntu also, and I expected that in Arch some things would break because of it being rolling and more bleeding-edge than Ubuntu.
For the record, I'm using arch since end of 2008 / beginning of 2009.
It is the first time I was very upset by a change from developer team.
I accepted that, but as it happened, it breaks _less_ than Ubuntu.
And, actually, about the rc.conf split, I couldn't care less. One file, three files, doesn't make a difference to me. As long as they are text files, and not binary ones, like some other mainstream systems, all is good.
Not 3, but 6 more files. I do agree you don't have to modify them everyday, but it is - in a way - harder to set u than a single one. If it's documented it's hard?
Sure one file would be easier, but if the 3,4,5 or 6 files are documented there should be no real problems.
Just my 0.02 € -- Regards.
-- Jelle van der Waa