Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Corbin <corbinbird@×××××××.net>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is gnome becoming obligatory?
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 11:42:50
Message-Id: a0d531cd-b53b-5295-b4e5-b95500f6363e@charter.net
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Is gnome becoming obligatory? by R0b0t1
1 On 12/10/2017 11:31 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
2 > Against my better judgement,
3 >
4 > On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 9:31 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés <caneko@×××××.com> wrote:
5 >> Up to a point, the same can be said about systemd; although many of its
6 >> programs can be and are used by end users, most of it is for distro
7 >> builders, programmers and administrators. And having a couple of Gentoo
8 >> boxes running Apache doesn't make anyone an administrator, BTW.
9 >>
10 > I have met Gentoo users who maintain, for fun, far more complex and
11 > capable systems than some system administrators who are paid for their
12 > work. There is no reason you are any more credible than a random
13 > mailing list user.
14 >
15 >> That's why most of Gentoo systemd users (and we are *a lot*; Gentoo has
16 >> great systemd support with several Gentoo devs collaborating with the
17 >> project) usually just ignore this kind of threads. Most of the time is a lot
18 >> of people which don't use it badmouthing a really cool piece of technology
19 >> that has been adopted by all large (and heavily used) Linux distributions
20 >> because the people that understand its technical merits realize that, for
21 >> the *general case*, its benefits outweigh whatever costs (in many cases
22 >> imaginary) it may have. And besides, for us it just works™, quietly running
23 >> in the background.
24 >>
25 > If you are saying this then you are choosing to ignore the technical
26 > arguments against systemd. You can claim you don't care and that is
27 > fine, but you've ignored what people are talking about and have
28 > injected your opinion into the discussion with a false air of
29 > superiority.
30 >
31 > The complaints in this thread may be a little extreme, but ultimately
32 > I agree these closely connected binary systems are not easily
33 > maintainable and are opaque to users.
34 >
35 > Cheers,
36 > R0b0t1
37 >
38 @R0b0t1
39
40 Agreed.
41
42 The phase "single point of failure" comes to mind.
43
44 In the past I have been forced to reload systems using "systemd" because
45 I was unable to figure out how to fix "systemd" init problems.
46
47 If the system uses ( SysV, OpenRC, BSD / Slackware ) type init, it is
48 not a major problem to fix.
49
50 Corbin