> Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2014 21:00:11 -0600 > From: Bruce Dubbs <bruce.du...@gmail.com> > To: LFS Support List <lfs-support@lists.linuxfromscratch.org> > Subject: Re: [lfs-support] LFS 20141104-systemd > > lf...@cruziero.com (akhiezer) wrote: > >> From: "Dr.-Ing. Edgar Alwers" <edgaralw...@gmx.de> > >> To: LFS Support List <lfs-support@lists.linuxfromscratch.org> > >> Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2014 22:14:34 +0100 > >> Subject: Re: [lfs-support] LFS 20141104-systemd > >> > >> > >> On Saturday 29 November 2014 21:21:50 Paul Rogers wrote: > >>>> I'm inclined to give up on systemd ( I don't want, like or need more > >>>> complexity) > >> is systemd really more complex ? > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > >> I just finisched building my BLFS-Systemd and it is working like a charm. > >> It > >> was, sure, a little different to build. But more complex ? > > > > > > What do _you_ think? > > > > > >> It is faster, in my opinion. I agree, this does not need to be an argument. > >> One question is, is it worth to be defined as the new system on LFS ? if > >> yes, > >> what are the arguments ? Or is it just an alternative ? > > > > > > You seem to pop up periodically with bursts of more-or-less exactly the > > same purported questions at more-or-less exactly the same level; and always > > seem to _insinuate_ a stance rather than stating anything explicitly. > > > > > > What do _you_ think are the answers to these same ostensible questions > > that you ask yet again. Has your understanding and knowledge of the issues > > developed at all since the last burst. > > > > > > What does "is it worth to be defined as the new system on LFS" even mean? > > Are > > you trying to say - but choking on the notion of actually stating something > > explicitly - that you think that the "main" lfs should be systemd; or what? > > > > > >> I personally dont understand why "systemd flame wars" happened. > > > > > > And? > > > > > > Again, you seem to _insinuate_ something limply rather than state anything > > clearly and explicitly. What is it that you're trying to say. What do you > > think should have happened. > > > > > > (Btw, are you talking about "systemd flame wars" in general, or the > > blfs-systemd flame wars and schism/fork.) > > > > > >> With many thanks to _all_ developers, > > > > > > - another asinine limp string of characters. '_all_' developers includes > > a _very_ wide spectrum of behaviours and activities: u sure you mean > > accurately "_all_" ? > > I don't think these comments are called for. Not everyone follows > development issues. >
Neither of your two sentences necessarily apply to the OP and that reply to it. Your two sentences aren't even necessarily linked strongly; as such, the second is more non-sequitir. akh > -- Bruce > -- -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
