On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 10:22:21AM -0500, T.J. Duchene wrote: > Thanks very much, everyone. > > I especially appreciate the dependency information with no bias. Just the > facts is always appreciated on an emotional issue such as this. > > The truth is that I can live with a stray library or a shim - but the rest > leaves me concerned. > > Setting aside all of the controversy, there seems to be one undeniable > design fact. Unless I am overlooking something relevant, Systemd is adding > a single point of failure on a critical process chain. On a desktop, I don't > care, but on a 24/7 server that is something I really can't afford. Any > server will eventually fail, but I don't feel comfortable risking cron > timing, startup and logging failure all in one swoop by having systemd > control everything. > > I know you can disable portions of systemd, because I have, but the > pervasive nature of the package dependencies makes it much harder to ignore. > > From the sound of things, I'd very much like to give Debian 8 the benefit of > the doubt. I'll wait and see, if there are more posts and not dismiss it > entirely. Until more information comes in down the road, it is probably > prudent for me to continue to look at a server migration plan that firmly > does not include systemd. > >
Hello TJ I have been using Debian for almost 14 years continuosly, and i had to transfered 1 server to OpenBSD, because the comments in this list are uncertain; i can not wait for Jessi to do the transition. Bye. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140918174221.ga20...@consultores.ca