1 |
On 03/27/2013 01:08 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Jake Margason <jmargason758@×××××.com> wrote: |
3 |
>> I ran away from Arch last year to get away from all this systemd stuff. I |
4 |
>> hope that you guys will continue to support openrc for as long as possible. |
5 |
> |
6 |
> Don't do top posting, please. |
7 |
> |
8 |
>> One question though. why does everyone seem to be migrating towards systemd? |
9 |
>> How is it superior? is openrc just a dead project is that why? |
10 |
> |
11 |
> That's three questions ;) |
12 |
> |
13 |
> 1. "why does everyone seem to be migrating towards systemd?" |
14 |
> |
15 |
> Not everyone is migrating towards systemd (yet), but the trend is |
16 |
> certainly that more and more distros switch to it or at least offer it |
17 |
> as a first class alternative to whatever other init system they use. |
18 |
> As for why, I think it's for two reasons: a) it works, b) upstream |
19 |
> udev merged with systemd, and most distros just follow upstream. |
20 |
> |
21 |
> 2. "How is it superior?" |
22 |
> |
23 |
> Well, that's the pickle. If you are like me, then systemd it's |
24 |
> superior to OpenRC basically in every single way. If you are one of |
25 |
> the people that thinks that something called "the UNIX way" actually |
26 |
> exists, or that "Linux/Gentoo is about choice", or that we should care |
27 |
> about our *BSD cousins keeping up with us, then systemd is far |
28 |
> inferior. |
29 |
> |
30 |
> From a technical point of view (the quality of the code and the time |
31 |
> it takes to fix bugs), I believe everyone (even Lennart's most fervent |
32 |
> detractors) will agree that systemd is a superb piece of software. The |
33 |
> problem is the philosophy behind it; if you agree with said |
34 |
> philosophy, systemd is great. Otherwise, is a new fangled beast which |
35 |
> goes against everything that UNIX stands for (whatever that means), "a |
36 |
> solution for a problem no one has", and "fixing something that wasn't |
37 |
> broken". |
38 |
> |
39 |
> 3. "is openrc just a dead project is that why?" |
40 |
> |
41 |
> Is not dead; it has new releases and stuff. Just not many features are |
42 |
> implemented to it, and it has some pretty awkward bugs, some of them |
43 |
> years old, like not being able to start services in parallel. |
44 |
> |
45 |
> It's obviously better that SysV. From my point of view, that's not enough. |
46 |
> |
47 |
> Hope it helps. |
48 |
> |
49 |
> Regards. |
50 |
> |
51 |
|
52 |
A nice, reasonably even-handed writeup. :) |