[arch-general] Arch's move to systemd integration
Paul Gideon Dann
pdgiddie at gmail.com
Mon Jul 23 04:38:59 EDT 2012
On Sunday 22 Jul 2012 15:14:13 Myra Nelson wrote:
> My comparison to file size was meant to be extended to the complete
> removal of rc.d and conf.d or the removal of several files in those
> directories. Maybe that concept is not that important. I didn't mean
> to imply the KISS principle was about size, just trying to imply this
> change doesn't necessarily violate that principle.
When I read about file sizes, my immediate thought was that it's being used as
a metric for simplicity of configuration. Did noone else think this? If the
configuration file sizes are small, this might indicate that it won't be a
nightmare to configure.
> My main argument
> was "If I can get this done anyone can. It's not that much different,
> it's just different". It appears to me to be just as portable as the
> current setup and it might just save the Devs some time, and provide
> better integration with upstream devs. Another salient point is just
> because it's been done that way since Moses was a baby doesn't make it
> right. Sorry if I offend anyone.
Thank you for sharing this Myra; I think this is a helpful argument. The
lesson seems to be: systemd is not difficult to use; it's just new, shiny, and
different. Don't be scared of it.
As for me, I haven't made the switch yet mainly because I haven't had the time
to look into it properly.
More information about the arch-general