On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Geoff <capsthorne@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On Fri, 17 Aug 2012 04:08:32 -0500 C Anthony Risinger <anthony@xtfx.me> wrote:
<snip>
the boot process isn't really that interesting (once you know/understand it anyway ... if not i encourage you to explor ;-) -- every distro pretty much does it the same way, but pointlessly independent, thus resulting in annoying differences that are completely irrelevant to begin with.
Thank you for a measured reply Anthony. I take your points. I have also watched LP's FOSDEM systemd presentation on Youtube (understanding about 80% of it), and read most of the links provided by other posters (especially the internal debate between Red Hat devs). I understand that there are advantages, but I am left with the lingering impression that systemd is part of a larger project, - as discussed by Fons Adriaensen in this thread. It bothers me.
"Part of a larger project". Yes, I have the same feeling, but it doesn't have to be necessarily a bad thing. That would depend, in part, on what the larger project is. For example, upstart is part of a larger project (Ubuntu), so is git (Linux). Hey, even GCC is part of a bigger project (GNU). Some people fear that if you use it you will be giving something to that unknown project behind systemd. But if it takes you where you don't want to go, it can be forked. It has happened before with bigger projects. That's the great thing of opensource, you don't have put up with the powers behind: fork - improve - share. But for the time being they didn't give me any reason to believe that they have a hidden agenda or that they are evil, or anything... -- Rodrigo