| 1 |
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 12:37:58 -0500 |
| 2 |
Canek Peláez Valdés <caneko@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> This last part is important; if you don't like systemd, bitching about |
| 6 |
> it will do nothing: you have to use and contribute to the |
| 7 |
> alternatives. Linux (and Gentoo) are about choice, as long as there is |
| 8 |
> someone willing and able to provide that choice; no one will |
| 9 |
> (necessarily) provide that choice for you out of nothing. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
The kind of choice I am speaking about is the choice of "rolling |
| 13 |
your own." I want to be able to control and customize my system |
| 14 |
in a way that I deem fit. The kernel, after it loads and does its |
| 15 |
initialization thing, passes control onto an arbitrary program for |
| 16 |
further configuration. This simple design allows extreme versatility |
| 17 |
and customization for those who want it while also permitting more |
| 18 |
complex schemes as well. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
In this case, there is no contribution to be made. There can only |
| 21 |
be a rant about leaving things the way they are. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
How do you feel about the accuracy of the following statements which |
| 24 |
are taken from a related web page at http://uselessd.darknedgy.net ? |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
"Most core Linux applications and even the kernel are developed by |
| 27 |
a handful of companies, largely by Red Hat (who inherited much of the |
| 28 |
work on GNU after acquiring Cygnus Solutions, thus also leading GNOME |
| 29 |
and various other projects), who also support the opaque Freedesktop.org |
| 30 |
standards. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
"systemd is designed to be perpetually rolling software, not all that |
| 33 |
different from a kernel in user space, as was elucidated in a 2014 GNOME |
| 34 |
Asia talk. It has no clearly defined purpose beyond that other than the |
| 35 |
vague 'basic building block to make an OS from' ... |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
"The end goal appears to be the creation of what we dub a Grand Unified |
| 38 |
Linux Operating System (GULOS) and the destruction of the Linux distribution |
| 39 |
altogether beyond cosmetic changes. GnomeOS, in particular. The latter is |
| 40 |
actually a thing that GNOME aspire to accomplish." |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
IMO such planning and goals are slowly taking over the Linux ecosystem. |
| 43 |
After all, RedHat cannot offer a fragmented and "hobbyist" OS to its paying |
| 44 |
corporate clients. Only a "Grand Unified Linux OS," a la Microsoft Windows, |
| 45 |
can compete in a professional market, and RedHat will thus lead the way in |
| 46 |
destroying the simplicity of Linux. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
These trends should be alarming to us all. |
Archives