| 1 |
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 3:23 PM, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@×××××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 11/23/2014 1:07 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés <caneko@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> So, don't be surprised if FreeBSD develops something *really* similar |
| 5 |
>> (along the lines of the second bullet) to systemd in the future |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Doesn't matter because: |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> a) it won't be systemd |
| 10 |
> (with all of its warts) |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> b) it won't be written by Lennart and company |
| 13 |
> (so won't have any of that baggage either) |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I'm a happy sysvinit+sysvrc, upstart, sysvinit+openrc, and systemd user. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
As far as an init system brings up the OS, starts the daemons that I |
| 18 |
want, and allows me to troubleshoot failures, I couldn't care less |
| 19 |
what init system's controlling boot. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I therefore find anti-systemd posts like this one puzzling, and even |
| 22 |
surreal, since the people making them are theoretically technical, and |
| 23 |
therefore logical. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Lennart made some design choices that I wish that he hadn't made but |
| 26 |
I'm not losing any sleep over this; and I don't understand why anyone |
| 27 |
else should. |
Archives