Quoting Peter Ross ([email protected]): > The beauty (and longevity) of Unix is its modular approach with clearly > defined APIs.
Efforts to have this discussion tend to be doomed in advance because people mean various things when they use the word 'modular' (no kidding). See: http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/ It's good to review that page before launching arguments on this matter. But, that having been said, your point is an excellent one. If I need to replace my MTA with a different implementation, my sshd with a different one, my command shell with a different one, my choice of awk, my choice of grep, my choice of window manager, my choice of httpd, my choice of ftpd, I can do so without limitation because of clean, well-defined, modest, non-tangled programming interfaces that face towards other code. Poetteringware has over the years shown an increasing tendency to ignore and eschew that virtue, and systemd does so with a vengeance. And I, for one, intend to laugh heartily whenever I hear that there's a problem with some systemd module that cannot be avoided by switching to a compatible replacement because none exist. -- Cheers, "I don't need to test my programs. Rick Moen I have an error-correcting modem." [email protected] - Om I. Baud McQ! (4x80) _______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list [email protected] http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main
