> Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 15:41:16 +0100 > From: Frans de Boer <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [lfs-support] systemd versus sysvinit > > On 02/16/2014 02:55 PM, akhiezer wrote: > >> Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 12:59:19 +0100 > >> From: Frans de Boer <[email protected]> > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: [lfs-support] systemd versus sysvinit > >> > >> Dear All, > >> > >> It looks like most Linux distributions are switching to systemd from > >> sysvinit. As Bruce is even one of the (co-?)authors of systemd, the > >> knowledge is already in the house. Why would (x)LFS stick to sysvinit > >> while the rest of the world is moving to systemd? > >> > > > > > > - well, maybe much of 'the Linux world': much of 'the rest of the world' > > uses windows/mac/android; why would you use linux (per se) when much of > > 'the rest of the world' has not moved to it? > > This was written in the context of Linux & LFS. >
Yes, that's taken as read. But it's not the central point there. The central point there is that you seem to advocate a plain'n'simple follow-the-herd mentality. You seem to advocate a switch simply because (you don't give any other reason there) 'everyone else is doing it': i.e. because there is a majority, within a given set of people, doing a thing, then you advocate following suit. If that's the basis for your reasoning, then: apply it to another set, e.g. computer use in general, and then ask why don't you advocate using windows/mac ? Why stick to linux when the vast majority of the rest of the world is with windows/mac? Your exhibiting a behaviour within one context, does not preclude folks pointing out to you at least some downsides of that: and illustrating by pointing out to you things like, for just one example, 'well what would be the outcome if you behaved the same way - took the same attitude - in this slightly wider and related context'. > > There is of course the systemd-lfs branch. ((It's apt to be known as > > 'systemd-lfs' rather than 'lfs-systemd', to get correct the order of > > 'drivers' - i.e. dictating what you will do.)) > > > > > >> Of course, simplicity might be one reason. After all sysvinit system is > >> much easier to understand then the somewhat more complex systemd system. > >> However, if everybody was thinking like this, there would be no progress > >> ever. > > > > > > That 'However ...' sentence appears to contain multiple fallacious > > assumptions, leaps of 'logic', &c: could you detail a bit more your line > > of thought there? (GroupThink & LockStep) != (genuine value & progress). > > > > I was not meant to take on the whole world so don't take it too literally. > I think you miss the point, namely (& again): your 'However ...' sentence appears to contain multiple fallacious assumptions, leaps of 'logic', &c: it doesn't really follow from or tie-in well, with what you say anywhere else; could you detail a bit more your line of thought there? > > > >> I also think that in order to keep (x)LFS attractive to new followers, > >> the project should go with the flow. > >> > > > > > > A POS always has its attractants. > > > > Bear in mind that Linux start by going, at least substantially, against > > the flow. You may wish to lookup the von Neumann / Hilbert quote about > > the flow of rivers. > > > > > >> Since my days of programming are long past, I can only offer my system > >> resources for (test)building development versions - much as what I do > >> today. > >> > > > > > > Again, there's the sysd-lfs branch. Were you aware of that? > > > > No, I was not aware of that but have found it in the mean time. I will > look into it, thanks for the pointers! > You're welcome. Enjoy your precious time spend on it. rgds, akh > Frans. > > -- -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
