What I would like to stress is that systemd is practically incompatible and a great annoyance for both Hurd and kfreeBSD. OpenRC IMHO always seemed a better replacement for the traditional init. My 2 cents. On Oct 10, 2014 5:15 PM, "Jason Young" <doom...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Normally I'm content to lurk and read things that happen on this mailing > list, but what Michael here has linked has me where I just have to respond. > > If this is what the systemd people wanted in the first place, then > everything that has come before seems to be a deception. In the guise of > solving init problems, they mean to start a process that would end Linux as > we know it. > > At this point, it's a different OS, and one that seems to be a whole lot > of work for seemingly not much of a result. I'm honestly having a hard time > wrapping my head around just what they're trying to do with this. With all > these multiple versions of distros and DEs and such, it seems to me this is > just setting up for even more bugs, user headaches, and huge amounts of > wasted hard drive space. > > I'd like to think that were this forwarded to various distro heads, they'd > drop systemd like the plague and invest in something like OpenRC, but I'm > not very optimistic about that anymore. > > On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Michael <codejod...@gmx.ch> wrote: > >> >> Speaking about exchanging complexity... >> http://0pointer.net/blog/revisiting-how-we-put-together-linux-systems.html >> (busy start with chapter 'User') >> >> All that under the hood of 'systemd' just appears like a trojan horse. >> They should've called it DLL (Distributors-Less Linux) in the first place. >> >> And yes, they're gonna replace Login and the Linux VT console too :) just >> about anything. >> >> >> >> -- >> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-amd64-requ...@lists.debian.org >> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact >> listmas...@lists.debian.org >> Archive: >> https://lists.debian.org/20141010151905.2c679...@mirrors.kernel.org >> >> >
