On 02/04/2014 07:46 PM, Igor Živković wrote: > On 02/04/2014 06:54 PM, Armin K. wrote: >> On 02/04/2014 06:26 PM, Igor Živković wrote: >>> On 2014-02-04 18:18, Armin K. wrote: >>>> http://meetings-archive.debian.net/pub/debian-meetings/2013/debconf13/webm-high/983_Why_Debian_should_or_should_not_make_systemd_the_default.webm >>>> >>>> >>>> Lennart managed to explain why/why not should Debian (but can be applied >>>> to many other distros) use systemd by default. He got some interesting >>>> points there. Since I noticed that some of you don't really understand >>>> what systemd really does except the binary logs, adding bloat and using >>>> D-Bus, it might be worth to watch. >>> >>> >>> http://wizardofbits.tumblr.com/post/45232318557/systemd-more-like-shit-stemd >>> >>> >> >> Looks interesting, I'll read it later. I did notice lot of UNIX word >> usage there, so it's natural that people who still "worship UNIX" are >> against systemd. > > Not really, people who worship Unix would probably pick one of *BSD. > It's more like that some people aren't happy about their systems slowly > being turned into the systemd monoculture. >
I do like the article, it explains a lot of things very nice. I'm currently halfway through it at the time of writing, but I don't like some of his points, namely: "Now, in Unix system design, it is a generally understood principle that a big task not be handled by a big program, but rather a collection of small programs, each tackling one specific, well-defined component of the larger task. You often hear the phrase “do one thing, and do it well” as a guiding principle for writing a Unix program." While this was true long time ago, today it might not be. Especially for consumer programs. "Init should be kept simple and stupid. There is NO reason for it to be otherwise." There is also NO reason for it NOT to be otherwise. Both are valid options. It's matter of taste. "Systemd was originally written by a guy with the Rowling-esque name of Lennart Poettering for Red Hat, and boy is it a hot mess." As I said in my original post, people seem to hate systemd more because of Lennart and partially D-Bus usage, nothing else. I do agree that he has personality issues, but it doesn't mean that his software is bad just because HE wrote it. "It’s replaced udevd, the device node manager." This is rather everything but true. The very same udev still exists, but rather as part of systemd source tree, not seperate one. It's not really systemd's fault that program writers feel systemd is the right way to do something that they want to. -- Note: My last name is not Krejzi. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
