[arch-general] When will Arch switch to Systemd

[C Anthony Risinger]

oh... my.  there is too much <expletive deleted> to respond properly
so i'll try touch a couple [several] things ...

... why the resistance at all? let me reiterate this niiiice and slow:

SYSVINIT HAS NO POWER, NO FUNCTIONALITY, AND ABSOLUTELY ZERO
USEFULNESS ON IT'S OWN.

the "unix philosophy" (debatable in itself...) of doing one thing
doesn't usually translate to LITERALLY DOING ONE THING.

please please please, please, read that several times until it sinks
in nice and deep; every single argument about sysvinit's "simplicity",
"maturity", blah blah, woka woka, etc etc, and anything else related
to it's stability is complete nonsense because ...

YOUR BOOT PROCESS IS A MEGAMATRON SHELL SCRIPT, AND HAS PEANUTS TO DO
WITH INIT; IN FACT, INIT IS NOT EVEN NEEDED.

capisce?  good.  now we can move on and give up this pointless cling
to something that provides us nothing WHATSOEVER.

systemd is superior in every single way imaginable.  that is the pure
and simple truth; it's not even an arguable point.  many of the
"concerns" here are already answered/clarified higher up in the
thread, or are nothing more than FUD and personal grudges against a
guy who seems to SIMPLY WANTS TO IMPROVE THINGS AND DOESN'T CARE IF
YOU WANT TO USE SYSVINIT FOR 60 MORE YEARS.  systemd solves real
user/business problems, and whether or not you/me/us make personal use
of every single possible feature is irrelevant.

these sentiments are echoed throughout most of community.

systemd has <whatever number> binaries?? yeah, and?  so what?  take a
hard look at the precious sysvinit "suite"; you'll find 1700 external
calls to grep, sed, awk, cut, ..., ... even if it mattered one tiny
little bit, i'm pretty sure you'll exceed systemd's count in the first
file or two.  i've been thru the init scripts several times and ramfs
init; i know.  just believe me.

why should init do "do almost nothing"??  how many other applications
do we slick developers write where the goal is to do a whole 'lotta
nothing?  come on.  systemd doesn't step out of scope one bit; it's
job is to reliably start, stop, and babysit processes with the
parameters, environment, and constraints WE DEFINE.  that's it; feels
pretty dang simple/kiss to me.  actually take a look at your boot
process someday... then come back and drone on about how slick systemd
is.

so what if systemd requires the latest <insert here>?  that's what we
run around here.  nobody cares about a server running <insert deity>
knows whatever version; just use sysvinit like usual... wait, what's
the argument again?

... really, drop everything about pulseaudio.  there are many many
people involved with both projects.  this has to be the single dumbest
argument imaginable.  i'd link to a list of fallacies again but it's
already been; do a search, then come back with real concerns.

nobody cares about how complex systemd might look to a user who has
neither read/understood the code nor even looked at the VERY COMPLETE
man pages.  this quite possibly rings in as the second dumbest
argument.  take a look at your kernel, what are we at, like 12 million
SLOC?  look at any decent software your using RIGHT NOW... what do you
find?  yup, code.  *gasp*

CK/PK are (AFAIK) advancements that let various CLI/GUI/UI/automated
tools perform dangerous tasks with high levels of control;  fine
grained permissions.  very few business problems are solved by coarse
unix permissions on the FS.  btw, introducing arguments with "i don't
know what X is, understand why it exists, nor have i even attempted to
realize why it might be useful, but it's total garbage because ... "
effectively destroys yourself before you've started.  developers write
software to solve problems, not chase pixies.

well it's time for a recess.  i'm am at a serious loss of words for
most of this; i fail to understand how one can competently arrive to
the conclusion that sysvinit is even close to the same skillset as
systemd... sysvinit is a fckn bench-warming waterboy whose only on the
team because he never graduated and his dad invented the sport 40
years ago.

so, look beyond the "boot", and read about systemd and the incredible
flexibility it provides before looking for the nearest rock to throw.
i suggest here again:

http://0pointer.de/public/systemd-man/systemd.exec.html
http://0pointer.de/public/systemd-man/systemd.unit.html
http://0pointer.de/public/systemd-man/systemd.service.html
http://0pointer.de/public/systemd-man/systemd.socket.html
http://0pointer.de/public/systemd-man/systemd.mount.html

now, tell me how sysvinit provides even 5% of that functionality?
some of that i don't even know how to accomplish MANUALLY, and others
i don't even know WTF they do.

holy frustration batman.

C Anthony