Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: microcai <microcai@×××××××××××××.org>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Optional /usr merge in Gentoo
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 02:39:35
Message-Id: CAMgqO2xkTJnF2g-poR3aVQA8q29T=K_d9B4z1vuc5gHf9EZXJw@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Optional /usr merge in Gentoo by pk
1 在 2013-8-19 上午5:55,"pk" <peterk2@××××××××.se>写道:
2 >
3 > On 2013-08-18 23:08, Mick wrote:
4 >
5 > > I honestly cannot understand why we/Gentoo are allowing the RHL
6 > > monolithic development philosophy to break what we have. Is
7 > > Poettering the only developer available to the Linux world? Are
8 > > RHL dictating what path Debian and its cousin distros should
9 > > follow?
10 >
11 > Problem is that Linux is dependent on udev and udev is in the hands of
12 > Kay Sievers which also develops systemd together with Lennart
13 > Poettering which in turn used to be a Gnome developer... With that
14 > said, what I cannot understand is why people advocating systemd (and
15 > the kitchen-and-sink model) are using Gentoo in the first place. Are
16 > they just trying to make the rest of the Linux distro landscape as
17 > miserable as Fedora? Why don't they stay with Fedora instead of trying
18 > to turn Gentoo into Fedora?
19 >
20 > Best regards
21 >
22 > Peter K
23 >
24
25 any one complant to systemd is not a programer. he does not understand how
26 bad sysvinit it is from the code point of view..
27
28 some one even say the old version is more stable than latest version even
29 the author say no and drop the support.
30
31 this is all the stupicy of non programer. they think they understand progam
32 while in fact no.

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Optional /usr merge in Gentoo Daniel Campbell <lists@××××××××.us>