1 |
Am 17.09.2014 um 18:06 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés: |
2 |
> This is highly off-topic, and systemd-related, so if you don't want |
3 |
> your breakfast with a healthy amount of flames, skip it. |
4 |
> |
5 |
> iTWire posted an interview with Linus Torvalds[1], where the Big |
6 |
> Penguin himself gave a succinct and pretty fair opinion on systemd. |
7 |
> The gist of it can be resumed in two lines: |
8 |
> |
9 |
> "I don't personally mind systemd, and in fact my main desktop and |
10 |
> laptop both run it." |
11 |
> |
12 |
> I post it here because several times in the last discussions about |
13 |
> systemd, there was people asking what opinion Linus had about systemd. |
14 |
> I personally don't think Linus particular opinion matters at all in |
15 |
> this particular issue; in general people who likes systemd will |
16 |
> continue to like it, and people who despises it will continue to do |
17 |
> so, for any good, bad, real or imaginary reason. However, I *really* |
18 |
> like several things Linus says in the interview; some juicy bits: |
19 |
> |
20 |
> • "So I think many of the "original ideals" of UNIX are these days |
21 |
> more of a mindset issue than necessarily reflecting reality of the |
22 |
> situation." |
23 |
> |
24 |
> • "There's still value in understanding the traditional UNIX "do one |
25 |
> thing and do it well" model where many workflows can be done as a |
26 |
> pipeline of simple tools each adding their own value, but let's face |
27 |
> it, it's not how complex systems really work, and it's not how major |
28 |
> applications have been working or been designed for a long time. It's |
29 |
> a useful simplification, and it's still true at *some* level, but I |
30 |
> think it's also clear that it doesn't really describe most of |
31 |
> reality." |
32 |
> |
33 |
> • "...systemd is in no way the piece that breaks with old UNIX legacy." |
34 |
> |
35 |
> • " I'm still old-fashioned enough that I like my log-files in text, |
36 |
> not binary, so I think sometimes systemd hasn't necessarily had the |
37 |
> best of taste, but hey, details..[.]" |
38 |
> |
39 |
> • (About the "single-point-of-failure" "argument") "I think people are |
40 |
> digging for excuses. I mean, if that is a reason to not use a piece of |
41 |
> software, then you shouldn't use the kernel either." |
42 |
> |
43 |
> • "And there's a classic term for it in the BSD camps: "bikeshed |
44 |
> painting", which is very much about how random people can feel like |
45 |
> they have the ability to discuss superficial issues, because everybody |
46 |
> feels that they can give an opinion on the color choice. So issues |
47 |
> that are superficial get a lot more noise. Then when it comes to |
48 |
> actual hard and deep technical decisions, people (sometimes) realise |
49 |
> that they just don't know enough, and they won't give that the same |
50 |
> kind of mouth-time." |
51 |
> |
52 |
> It's an interesting read; I highly recommend it. |
53 |
> |
54 |
> [1] http://www.itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/65402-torvalds-says-he-has-no-strong-opinions-on-systemd |
55 |
|
56 |
thanks for the pointer ;-) |
57 |
|
58 |
S |