1 |
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés <caneko@×××××.com> wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
[snip] |
4 |
|
5 |
> I didn't started the thread, Wolfe did. I just answered his question |
6 |
> from my point of view. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> And, what community is being divided? Fedora,OpenSuse, and Arch use |
9 |
> systemd by default. Gentoo derivative Exherbo recommends it as init |
10 |
> system. It works great on Gentoo and Debian. I understand it even |
11 |
> works in Ubuntu. systemd has done more to unify the Linux ecosystem |
12 |
> than a lot of other projects in the last 20 years. |
13 |
> |
14 |
> And, really, I don't care about OpenBSD. I worked with it for three |
15 |
> years; it's a nice toy Unix. |
16 |
|
17 |
You do realize you just lost any moral high ground you might have had |
18 |
over saying things that might or might not offend others? Seriously? |
19 |
"toy"? |
20 |
|
21 |
I'm not an OpenBSD user. But I do know it's one of the longest-lived, |
22 |
most prominent UNIX-like systems in the ecosystem, and it's the home |
23 |
for a huge amount of code that's imported by virtually every other |
24 |
notable operating system. |
25 |
|
26 |
To call it a "toy" tells me you know next to nothing about the history |
27 |
(or even present) positions and involvement of the major players of |
28 |
the UNIX-like ecosystem over the last twenty years. |
29 |
|
30 |
> But for serious work (server, desktop and |
31 |
> mobile) I prefer Linux, and in my case (except for my phone, that uses |
32 |
> Android) I run Gentoo+systemd in all my machines. You don't have to |
33 |
> agree with that, is my personal preference. |
34 |
|
35 |
Canek, I have to ask. Have you ever done _anything_ outside of |
36 |
academia? Up to Masters, academia is learning about what is. |
37 |
Afterward, it's either about teaching or discovering what may be...but |
38 |
a Masters only teaches you theory. A Doctorate is a discovery of a |
39 |
truth under controlled conditions. The real world is nowhere near that |
40 |
clean. |
41 |
|
42 |
Quite frankly, I've found your emails to have to have a far more pomp, |
43 |
ipsie dixit arguments, playbook arguments and appeals to authority |
44 |
than hard, technical defense of arguments against your positions in |
45 |
debate. Generally, I try to ignore you, and when I respond, it's |
46 |
usually because your emails carry with them a tone of authority that |
47 |
could easily mislead the uninformed into assuming he'd just read the |
48 |
One True Way on some subject--something that's terrible when there are |
49 |
real differences and not always clear-cut answers. |
50 |
|
51 |
I try very, very hard to avoid both the use and appearance of use of |
52 |
ad hominem arguments and reasoning. I do my damnedest to give the |
53 |
benefit of the doubt. However, quite frankly, I've read almost |
54 |
everything you've posted to this list over the last year and a half, |
55 |
and you've never consistently exhibited an awareness of pragmatic |
56 |
concerns for the subject, an understanding of the low levels issues in |
57 |
theoretical concerns of the subject, or an ability to stick to |
58 |
technical argument in a non-evasive fashion; that you might be wrong |
59 |
on a technical point never occurs to you, and when pressed, you engage |
60 |
in sophistry. Quite frankly, you act and speak more like a PR |
61 |
spokesman than an engineer. |
62 |
|
63 |
It's this behavior that probably led Bruce to make a crack about your |
64 |
defense of systemd to an irrational degree. You advocate, but you |
65 |
don't respond to criticisms with substance, suggesting your advocacy |
66 |
isn't something based on rational motivation. |
67 |
|
68 |
My purpose in debate isn't to win, it's to understand. I would be |
69 |
positively delighted if you would approach debate the with the same |
70 |
goal; we might be able to learn from each other. |
71 |
|
72 |
-- |
73 |
:wq |