On 07/19/2014 11:10 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 07/19/2014 09:05 AM, Always Learning wrote:
>> On Sat, 2014-07-19 at 09:08 +0300, Veli-Pekka Kestilä wrote:
>>
>>> It is actually funny how there seems to be so many opponents of systemd 
>>> who want back the old ways of doing things.
>> These are the causes:-
>>
>> 1. Familiarity with something that works and can be modified without
>> much effort- very important consideration in the computer world.
>>
>> 2. "Conservative" because new software is renown for creating "time
>> wasting" frustration and irritation and sometimes "breakdowns".
>>
>> 3. Adherer to the principle "If it is working, do not repair or replace
>> it".
>>
>> 4. Lack of knowledge about the replacement.
>>
>>
>> The systemd files do look like Windoze .ini files.
>>
>>
> Well ..  all of that may be true and systemd may be the devil ... but we
> would still have it as CentOS-7 rebuilds RHEL-7 sources.  Debating
> whether or not systemd is a good idea is not relevant for CentOS.  It is
> upstream, it is default, therefore it will be installed.  That's just
> how it is.
>
> We just had a bazillion mail thread on systemd and how it is terrible,
> we don't need any more.
>
> If you want to see systemd taken out of CentOS ... then figure out how
> to take it out.

NOTE:  That post was not specifically at "Always Learning" .. that just
happened to be the mail in this thread I was reading at the time.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Reply via email to