On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Frank Peters <frank.pet...@comcast.net> wrote: > On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 12:58:46 -0500 > Barry Schwartz <chemoelect...@chemoelectric.org> wrote: > >> >> ‘Diversity’ here is deviation from established Unix/POSIX philosophy >> in system design. Years of effort to simplify programming are being >> thrown away on grounds that resemble common arguments in favor of the >> ‘tight integration’ that is Microsoft Windows. I mean, seriously, many >> of the pro-systemd arguments are like those I have heard for using >> Windows: that applications ‘just work’, because they were written for >> a dominant system. >> > > Good design is highly flexible and configurable with little assumption > made on the nature or needs of the user. > > Let's consider a simple program to display digital images. A good program > design will not only contain built-in routines to accommodate the standard > image formats but will also provide non-specific raster buffers to allow > a user to view unconventional or even non-existent formats. A good program > design will also make no assumptions about the nature of the image data but > rather allow the user to create any needed specifications. A professional > program thus allows both standard conventions but keeps the overall capability > unrestricted and open ended. > > As best as I can understand (I am not an expert in systems programming) > under Torvalds the Linux OS conforms to such professional design goals.
No, the Linux kernel follows sound technical reasoning, not dogma. >> What I really fear, though, is what if one day the kernel team is a >> different entity, more like other entities in the Linux world? > > Someone has to write an apocalyptic novel about Linus Torvalds being > assassinated and his role taken over by the evil figures from ???. Read the link I just posted. Linus basically agrees with the "evil figures" from your conspiracy theories. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México