[arch-general] SystemD poll

[Curtis Shimamoto]

On 08/22/12 at 02:06am, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:44 AM, Alexandre Ferrando <alferpal at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > And sysvinit didn't have those when it began? Come on.
> 
> I don't know, I probably wasn't born yet, and probably there weren't
> even computers before. But supposing there was something before, I'm
> sure the people that made the transition did it in a responsible
> manner trying hard not to break anything.
> 
> That's nothing at all like systemd. Lennart Poettering is known for
> not caring if his software changes break stuff (there's always
> somebody else to blame), and I can probably point to dozens of
> problems that systemd has that initscripts doesn't (today). That's
> enough reason to hold on the move.
> 
> Do *you* care at all about breaking the boot process of your users?
> Some people care to the extreme, like debian, some people doesn't seem
> to care much, like Fedora (and it shows), and there's all kinds places
> in the middle of the continuum. But what I find surprising is that I
> haven't heard any strong advantages that would warrant the potential
> (already realized) of breaking people's boot process.
> 
> > Also, nobody is forcing you gun in hand, your life depending on it, to
> > use systemd. Arch is going to use it by DEFAULT, if you don't like it,
> > just install another init system and let everyone else do whatever
> > they feel like doing.
> 
> But initscripts is going to be eventually unmantained, right? So what
> choice would I have?
> 
> Also, nobody is forcing you to move to systemd *now* is there? You
> could just as easily move one year later, and in fact, it would be
> easier.
> 
> -- 
> Felipe Contreras

...and I think that we've now hit Godwin's Law (Lennart Poettering
edition)...

Felipe, you lose.  Please stop.

-- 
Curtis Shimamoto 
sugar.and.scruffy at gmail.com