| 1 |
On 03/06/2014 19:08, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: |
| 2 |
> Who is "forcing" anything? pm-utils has been unmaintained FOR FIVE |
| 3 |
> YEARS. Any project that decides to stop using it is making just the |
| 4 |
> right decision; UPower just did the correct thing. And systemd had |
| 5 |
> *nothing* to do with it, except for providing a better, more reliable |
| 6 |
> alternative. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> That's what you and many others don't seem to understand: systemd is a |
| 9 |
> *BETTER* implementation for basically *ALL* the hodgepodge of |
| 10 |
> "solutions" that we had before in our plumbing layer. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
<weak attempt to inject humour and lighten the thread mood> |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
This whole systemd thing looks awfully like the switch from a hosts file |
| 16 |
to DNS so many years ago. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
On the one had a hosts file worked and you could throw vi at it. |
| 19 |
On the other hand this DNS thing could be evil and we'd have to hand |
| 20 |
control over to <insert name of nebulous party here>. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Trouble is, a host file is an awful solution and really just does |
| 23 |
everything badly. Much like shell init scripts. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
We all, sysadmins and devs alike, agree that consistent interfaces are a |
| 26 |
very good idea, so we pick a standard and stick with it. And yet, |
| 27 |
strangely, there's so much resistance to doing just that with early user |
| 28 |
space. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
I'm not a systemd user, but I do find this whole thing quite funny :-) |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
</weak attempt to inject humour and lighten the thread mood> |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Alan McKinnon |
| 37 |
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com |
Archives