| 1 |
On 11/11/19 11:54, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 5:38 AM Wols Lists <antlists@××××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> On 09/11/19 19:51, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> |
| 6 |
>>> Only if somebody has created a generator for openrc, which I doubt. |
| 7 |
>>> It was obviously a semi-trollish comment. |
| 8 |
>>> |
| 9 |
>> Now that's harsh! Although yes I'm sure he was tweaking tails - hence |
| 10 |
>> the "tongue in cheek" smiley. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> I didn't intend to suggest that I thought it was mean-spirited. Just |
| 13 |
> stirring the pot. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
Fair enough. Trouble is, you can't be too careful with what you say on |
| 16 |
the internet - it's too easily taken out of context or just plain |
| 17 |
mis-understood. |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
>> Fact is, there are a lot of people out there who hate systemd because |
| 20 |
>> it's been successful, and it's been successful because it sticks to the |
| 21 |
>> nix philosophy of "do one thing, and do it well". |
| 22 |
>> |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Now, THAT is a semi-trollish comment if I ever saw one. :) |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> That said, you could argue that the individual components of systemd |
| 27 |
> do generally do one thing well. I think the criticism is more in the |
| 28 |
> packaging, and that the components mostly don't interchange with |
| 29 |
> anything non-systemd. Though as we can see from eudev/elogind and so |
| 30 |
> on that isn't strictly the case. |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> I sometimes describe systemd as the anti-busybox. |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> But, I don't want to derail the thread entirely... |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
Poettering is very much "do it right, if something else is already |
| 37 |
broken then just break it completely". Much better for a computer, but |
| 38 |
ruffles peoples' feathers ... |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
That said, yes we are derailing this thread somewhat :-) |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
Cheers, |
| 43 |
Wol |
Archives