> > Would we have DNSCurve without DNSSEC, will DNSSEC actually ever get
> > fixed having got it out sooner to do so or would it have died and not
> > been replaced. Would we have DNSSEC with ECC already, solving a large
> > chunk of the issues. Perhaps pertinent questions for Linux init?
>
> Ye
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 8:14 PM, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> Would we have DNSCurve without DNSSEC, will DNSSEC actually ever get
> fixed having got it out sooner to do so or would it have died and not
> been replaced. Would we have DNSSEC with ECC already, solving a large
> chunk of the issues. Perha
> My friends at Red Hat inform me there is little marked improvement with
> SystemD however "It would be jolly nice if we was all the same." so I'm
> slightly mystified at the vehement determination to adopt it?
It would be very nice but in fact whilst unifying some it's current over
spec'd desi
Hi All
What an interesting diatribe of views and opinions it's been with clearly many
individuals letting their guard down ever so slightly. initially I was of the
opinion that the original subject line of this thread was incorrect and should
have been "Petition to not implement SystemD." altho
> > Of course the Big Bang theory is morphing with one option being many
> > Big Bang's and that it was a point in history and not the beginning
> > which is perfectly plausible and systemd may morph sufficiently for
> > more users too, in time. I care little though (except any consequences)
> > an
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 5:06 AM, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> > Suppose for some reason the majority of scientists believe in the
> > theory of the Big Bang. And then I come along and wonder... where is
> > the evidence? Well, if the Big Bang theory has merits, there would be
> > tons of evidence, and
On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 11:06:12 +0100
Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> In fact in most cases that was exactly what happened with some
> scientists and teachers saying the Big Bang was all but proven until
> fairly recently the number questioning and the evidence built up
> against it. To me it has been obvio
> The cumulated amount of time spent on these endless discussions has
> now almost certainly get past the amount of time necessary to fix
> initscripts.
>
> Fix them instead of feeding trolls.
Except there will be more fallout from systemd's wide adoption than our
own selfish needs but as that is
> Every piece of complex software has bugs; those bugs
> won't be found if the software isn't tested, and since you're not willing
> to participate in that process you've no right to harass those who have.
Not everyone wants complex software, just about any other init
system let's you decide that.
> Suppose for some reason the majority of scientists believe in the
> theory of the Big Bang. And then I come along and wonder... where is
> the evidence? Well, if the Big Bang theory has merits, there would be
> tons of evidence, and any decent scientist that believes in this
> theory would gladly
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/27/2012 05:40 AM, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
> "you sir, are an arrant sack of shite -- a pitifully miserable sore
> spewing an egregious pus of arrogance and obstinance -- a first-class
> jerk-off!"
Wow, Stephen Fry would be proud.
http://youtu.
On 08/26/12 at 10:17pm, Chris Evans wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> From: rafael ff1
> To: General Discussion about Arch Linux
> Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2012 11:49 PM
> Subject: Re: [arch-general] SystemD poll
>
> 2012/8/27 C Anth
From: rafael ff1
To: General Discussion about Arch Linux
Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2012 11:49 PM
Subject: Re: [arch-general] SystemD poll
2012/8/27 C Anthony Risinger :
> On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Felipe Contreras
> wrote:
>>
>>
2012/8/27 C Anthony Risinger :
> On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Felipe Contreras
> wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> A bum on the street might not be a reliable source of information, but
>> he/she might still be saying the truth. Cops wouldn't take their word
>> at face value (or almost anyone for that
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Felipe Contreras
wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> A bum on the street might not be a reliable source of information, but
> he/she might still be saying the truth. Cops wouldn't take their word
> at face value (or almost anyone for that matter), but if a bum says
> there was a
On 08/26/12 at 07:55pm, Bigby James wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Felipe Contreras <
> felipe.contre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 6:30 PM, Bigby James wrote:
> >
> > > Having watched this thread (and the "Beware" thread) for some time, I can
> > > say without equ
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Felipe Contreras <
felipe.contre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 6:30 PM, Bigby James wrote:
>
> > Having watched this thread (and the "Beware" thread) for some time, I can
> > say without equivocation that Felipe is not trying to "reason" with
> >
On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 03:34:00PM +0200, R??my Oudompheng wrote:
> The cumulated amount of time spent on these endless discussions has
> now almost certainly get past the amount of time necessary to fix
> initscripts.
init scripts are irredeemable. The argument is more one of whether
systemd is
The cumulated amount of time spent on these endless discussions has
now almost certainly get past the amount of time necessary to fix
initscripts.
Fix them instead of feeding trolls.
Rémy.
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 07:15:26PM +0530, gt wrote:
> Maybe you can test the AUR package and see if works as good as your own
> setup, and maybe you can contribute to that package if you ever find the
> time to do so.
What I'd offer to the AUR is run scripts for common services like
apache, sshd,
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 6:30 PM, Bigby James wrote:
> Having watched this thread (and the "Beware" thread) for some time, I can
> say without equivocation that Felipe is not trying to "reason" with
> anyone. He clearly doesn't understand the concepts he himself refers to
> (rules of evidence, bu
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 05:56:32AM -0600, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 11:24:31PM -0500, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
> > so buck up, do something useful, or find
> > another outlet ... puh-puh-please?
>
> I'm not sure exactly what you're asking for here.
>
> When
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia <
archli...@ishpeck.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 10:03:44PM -0300, Denis A. Alto?? Falqueto wrote:
> > You know that all this jibber-jabber could be easily avoided if you
> > just asked for help or opened bug reports, don't y
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 11:24:31PM -0500, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
> ... are we done? you guys are really boring me to death here --
> interest level is pitifully low. yawn.
Pretty long message for someone who's uninterested.
> if you want to see a boot up process that uses daemontools, or runit
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 10:25 PM, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia <
archli...@ishpeck.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 11:34:28AM -0400, Brandon Watkins wrote:
> > > Can we then agree then that you don't *know* if systemd is stable
> > > enough to be used (in general, not only by you)?
>
> > >
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Felipe Contreras
wrote:
>
> No, I never said anything like that. All I said is [...]
>
> [...]
> [...]
> [...]
> [...]
> [...] [...] [...]
*yaaawn* ...
... are we done? you guys are really boring me to death here --
interest level is pitifully low. yawn.
if you
2012/8/25 Felipe Contreras :
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:39 PM, Stephen E. Baker
> wrote:
>> On 23/08/2012 4:14 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> [snip]
>>
>>> Is systemd ready? Where is the evidence?
>>
>>
>> https://www.archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics shows that about 14% of
>> arch users who
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 11:34:28AM -0400, Brandon Watkins wrote:
> > Can we then agree then that you don't *know* if systemd is stable
> > enough to be used (in general, not only by you)?
> > Felipe Contreras
> >
> Umm, the fact thats its been the default init system in several popular
> distros a
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 10:03:44PM -0300, Denis A. Alto?? Falqueto wrote:
> You know that all this jibber-jabber could be easily avoided if you
> just asked for help or opened bug reports, don't you? You know, just
> like when polite peopple try to solve their own problems and, when
> nothing else
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 04:48:01PM -0700, Patrick Murphy wrote:
> Could you give me a brief explanation as to why init scripts are better?
They really aren't. The best argument one can make in their favor
is that they're already debugged and stable. systemd, as a new
thing, will inevitably go t
Q: Is systemd ready? A: We don't know.
It's more ready than sysvinit or the fragile shell scripts which lack
basic features.
--
дамјан
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:39 PM, Stephen E. Baker
wrote:
> On 23/08/2012 4:14 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> [snip]
>
>> Is systemd ready? Where is the evidence?
>
>
> https://www.archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics shows that about 14% of
> arch users who are using pkgstat have systemd installed
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 2:47 AM, Norbert Zeh wrote:
> Felipe Contreras [2012.08.23 2214 +0200]:
>> Notice that I said "probably". Again, I don't *need* to provide any
>> evidence because I'm not making the claim that systemd has problems,
>> or that it's not ready, I am simply asking for evidence
> >
> http://osvdb.org/search?search%5Bvuln_title%5D=systemd&search%5Btext_type%5D=alltext
> >
> > Two local root exploits this year. So if your browser has a bug, systemd
> > would have allowed priveledge escalation
>
> Notice that these bugs were in logind (the console kit replacement) and n
On Aug 24, 2012 3:09 PM, "Kevin Chadwick" wrote:
>
http://osvdb.org/search?search%5Bvuln_title%5D=systemd&search%5Btext_type%5D=alltext
>
> Two local root exploits this year. So if your browser has a bug, systemd
> would have allowed priveledge escalation
Notice that these bugs were in logind (th
> Despite that, no serious (IMHO) bugs or architectural issues have been
> found (there has of course been plenty of irrelevant complaints, but
> those I ignore).
http://osvdb.org/search?search%5Bvuln_title%5D=systemd&search%5Btext_type%5D=alltext
Two local root exploits this year. So if your br
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> Not really, the Justice system fails perhaps more than it works. All of
> these responses are actually just diluting and ignoring the points he
> has raised and responding to responses of an inflammatory kind. The 14%
> using argument is ve
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
> On Thursday 23 Aug 2012 21:47:14 Norbert Zeh wrote:
>> I tried to keep my mouth shut but can't resist to reply here because I
>> simply don't understand how you think the world works. Do you want to see
>> proof that every piece of open-
> > I tried to keep my mouth shut but can't resist to reply here because I
> > simply don't understand how you think the world works. Do you want to see
> > proof that every piece of open-source software is ready to be used? That's
> > ridiculous. Open-source software is being developed. People
On Thursday 23 Aug 2012 21:47:14 Norbert Zeh wrote:
> I tried to keep my mouth shut but can't resist to reply here because I
> simply don't understand how you think the world works. Do you want to see
> proof that every piece of open-source software is ready to be used? That's
> ridiculous. Open-
Felipe Contreras [2012.08.23 2214 +0200]:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 11:02 PM, Andrew Hills wrote:
> > Felipe--if I may address you by your first name--in case you're
> > confused about why no one will listen to your arguments, let me
> > try to explain; it may reduce your frustration. You made the
2012/8/23 Stephen E. Baker :
> On 23/08/2012 4:14 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> [snip]
>>
>> Is systemd ready? Where is the evidence?
>
>
> https://www.archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics shows that about 14% of
> arch users who are using pkgstat have systemd installed. It is not default
> and no
On 23/08/2012 4:14 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote:
[snip]
Is systemd ready? Where is the evidence?
https://www.archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics shows that about 14% of
arch users who are using pkgstat have systemd installed. It is not
default and not depended on by anything, so that means a
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 11:02 PM, Andrew Hills wrote:
> Felipe--if I may address you by your first name--in case you're
> confused about why no one will listen to your arguments, let me
> try to explain; it may reduce your frustration. You made the
> following two statements without any evidence o
Felipe--if I may address you by your first name--in case you're
confused about why no one will listen to your arguments, let me
try to explain; it may reduce your frustration. You made the
following two statements without any evidence or even any
suggestion that you care about evidence:
> But supp
2012/8/22 Brandon Watkins :
[Felipe Contreras FUD]
>
> Umm, the fact thats its been the default init system in several popular
> distros already? Fedora 15+ , Opensuse 12.1 , Mageia 2, Mandriva 2011... I
> don't know why you keep hanging onto this idea that systemd is "untested"
> or "unproven", be
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Brandon Watkins wrote:
> Umm, the fact thats its been the default init system in several popular
> distros already? Fedora 15+ ,
In Fedora they didn't just went from sysv style scripts to full blown
systemd with all their features. They did it gradually in order
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:40 AM, Felipe Contreras <
felipe.contre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase
> wrote:
> > On 22.08.2012 02:48, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 22.08.20
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
> On 22.08.2012 02:48, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 22.08.2012 02:10, Felipe Contreras wrote:
Switching to systemd is not a small change, it's a revoluti
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto
wrote:
> You know that all this jibber-jabber could be easily avoided if you
> just asked for help or opened bug reports, don't you?
As I said multiple times, and even directly to you: I did, and even
Lennart was unable to help. But even i
On 08/22/12 at 02:06am, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:44 AM, Alexandre Ferrando
> wrote:
>
> > And sysvinit didn't have those when it began? Come on.
>
> I don't know, I probably wasn't born yet, and probably there weren't
> even computers before. But supposing there was s
On 22/08/12 at 04:23am, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
> On 22.08.2012 02:48, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> >On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase
> >wrote:
> >>On 22.08.2012 02:10, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> >>>On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Patrick Murphy
> >>>wrote:
> Could you give
On 22.08.2012 02:48, Felipe Contreras wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
On 22.08.2012 02:10, Felipe Contreras wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Patrick Murphy
wrote:
Could you give me a brief explanation as to why init scripts are better?
I'm newish to U
On 22/08/12 03:03, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Felipe Contreras
> wrote:
>> So if it works for you, it will surely work for *everybody* else. I
>> have seen this argument so many times that I'm starting to worry about
>> the rationality of Arch Linux users and
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Felipe Contreras
wrote:
> So if it works for you, it will surely work for *everybody* else. I
> have seen this argument so many times that I'm starting to worry about
> the rationality of Arch Linux users and developers.
>
> Yes, it's good to be on the bleeding edg
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
> On 22.08.2012 02:10, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Patrick Murphy
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Could you give me a brief explanation as to why init scripts are better?
>>> I'm newish to Unix style operating systems
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Felipe Contreras
wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Patrick Murphy wrote:
>> Could you give me a brief explanation as to why init scripts are better?
>> I'm newish to Unix style operating systems
>
> As I said; they are tried-and-true since *decades*, all t
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:28 AM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Felipe Contreras
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Patrick Murphy wrote:
>>> Could you give me a brief explanation as to why init scripts are better?
>>> I'm newish to Unix style operating systems
>>
On 22.08.2012 02:10, Felipe Contreras wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Patrick Murphy wrote:
Could you give me a brief explanation as to why init scripts are better?
I'm newish to Unix style operating systems
As I said; they are tried-and-true since *decades*, all the problems
have been
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Felipe Contreras
wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Patrick Murphy wrote:
>> Could you give me a brief explanation as to why init scripts are better?
>> I'm newish to Unix style operating systems
>
> As I said; they are tried-and-true since *decades*, all t
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Patrick Murphy wrote:
> Could you give me a brief explanation as to why init scripts are better?
> I'm newish to Unix style operating systems
As I said; they are tried-and-true since *decades*, all the problems
have been ironed out by slow small changes, so if som
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:44 AM, Alexandre Ferrando wrote:
> And sysvinit didn't have those when it began? Come on.
I don't know, I probably wasn't born yet, and probably there weren't
even computers before. But supposing there was something before, I'm
sure the people that made the transition d
Could you give me a brief explanation as to why init scripts are better?
I'm newish to Unix style operating systems
On Aug 21, 2012 4:40 PM, "Felipe Contreras"
wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:25 AM, Patrick Murphy
> wrote:
> > What alternative to systemd would you rather see?
>
> systemd is
On 22 August 2012 01:40, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:25 AM, Patrick Murphy wrote:
>> What alternative to systemd would you rather see?
>
> systemd is the alternative, the standard has been initscripts for
> decades. Now that distributions are switching to systemd they are
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:25 AM, Patrick Murphy wrote:
> What alternative to systemd would you rather see?
systemd is the alternative, the standard has been initscripts for
decades. Now that distributions are switching to systemd they are
starting to see boot problems that didn't exist before.
On 22 Aug 2012 07:22, "Felipe Contreras" wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Ionut Biru wrote:
>
> > with or without this poll, we are continuing with our plan.
>
> That's exactly what you should do, if your objective is to loose
> users; ignore them.
>
> Cheers.
>
> --
> Felipe Contreras
What alternative to systemd would you rather see? It makes things much
easier for the developers and if you don't like it you can fork arch into
your own disro. Besides relocating a changing some config files, systemd is
not going to have a noticeable impact on more than a few users. It offers
mor
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Ionut Biru wrote:
> with or without this poll, we are continuing with our plan.
That's exactly what you should do, if your objective is to loose
users; ignore them.
Cheers.
--
Felipe Contreras
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 07:14:29PM +0200, Damjan wrote:
> I don't understand why you think parsing is a hard thing. INI files have
> been around for millennia (in internet years) and both parsers and
> writers for them are well established in many languages.
The question is not whether it is har
2012/8/19 C Anthony Risinger
>
> IMO its very refreshing to finally see these deficiencies being tackled.
Linux landscape had been thirsty for years about these decisions. I like
very much the Arch approach to this matter and, as I said, I like systemd
as my init system.
>>> Remember it's not about whether or not you're allowed to use
>>> initscripts/systemd, it's about what will become the default.
>> No, maintaining both boot methods, even if upstream weren't
>> abandoning init scripts (which they are going to) would be
>> a terrible waste of time.
What upstr
A package for an MTA (for example) will have to know how to start
itself up. You're left with the following options:
1. Rework the MTA to startup with your own method
2. Have the package maintainer somehow allow both such as...
3. Post to the AUR (or whatever) another version of the same
On Aug 19, 2012 10:35 AM, "Alessio 'Blaster' Biancalana" <
dottorblas...@archlinux.us> wrote:
> 2012/8/19 Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia
> >
> > No, maintaining both boot methods, even if upstream weren't
> > abandoning init scripts (which they are going to) would be
> > a terrible waste of time.
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 05:28:16PM +0200, Damjan wrote:
> >A package for an MTA (for example) will have to know how to start
> >itself up. You're left with the following options:
> > 1. Rework the MTA to startup with your own method
> > 2. Have the package maintainer somehow allow both such as..
2012/8/19 Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia
> On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 01:23:12PM +0200, Roel Deckers wrote:
> > Remember it's not about whether or not you're allowed to use
> > initscripts/systemd, it's about what will become the default.
>
> No, maintaining both boot methods, even if upstream weren
A package for an MTA (for example) will have to know how to start
itself up. You're left with the following options:
1. Rework the MTA to startup with your own method
2. Have the package maintainer somehow allow both such as...
3. Post to the AUR (or whatever) another version of the same
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 01:23:12PM +0200, Roel Deckers wrote:
> Remember it's not about whether or not you're allowed to use
> initscripts/systemd, it's about what will become the default.
No, maintaining both boot methods, even if upstream weren't
abandoning init scripts (which they are going to)
On Sunday 19 Aug 2012 13:23:12 Roel Deckers wrote:
> I think a poll is a good idea.
> Remember it's not about whether or not you're allowed to use
> initscripts/systemd, it's about what will become the default.
> Sure, in the end it's the devs who get the final call, they're putting
> in the work a
On Sunday 19 Aug 2012 19:11:12 you wrote:
> I think the debate of default is useless.
I meant the voting not debate. That was typo.
--
Cheers and Regards
Jayesh Badwaik
stop html mail | always bottom-post
www.asciiribbon.org | www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Quoted from [1]:
"The hardest thing about voting is determining when to do it. In
general, taking a vote should be very rare—a last resort for when all
other options have failed. Don't think of voting as a great way to
resolve debates. It isn't. It ends discussion, and thereby ends creative
thi
> A poll is the best way to solve this
> problem.
A poll would be better done by the mailing list but I can't see anyone
counting and verifying (even then newly seen addresses can't be
verified) and many people don't really care as long as they're system
works the way they want which is why Window
I agree with you. Using systemd to be the default or not is a very
disputable issue. Many people like me do not like it, but some people think
that it is the trend and so accept it. A poll is the best way to solve this
problem.
2012/8/19 Roel Deckers
> I think a poll is a good idea.
> Remember i
I think a poll is a good idea.
Remember it's not about whether or not you're allowed to use
initscripts/systemd, it's about what will become the default.
Sure, in the end it's the devs who get the final call, they're putting
in the work after all, but a poll can show whether the community
agrees wi
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 01:52:59PM +0200, R??my Oudompheng wrote:
> I don't understand why you are saying that.
I can't speak for him but I can tell you why I say it.
Parsing a config file is _always_ unnecessary complexity. It
is where some of the biggest bugs lurk. It hurts the
functional par
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 12:03:55PM +0100, Geoff wrote:
> As I have said in a previous post, I arrived in linux a little later than you,
> but for much the same reasons. On "KISS" / "The Arch Way" / "Unix philosophy"
> etc, it seems to me that here as in my own field (law), maxims make good
> servan
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 08:11:58PM +1000, John Briggs wrote:
> IMHO the cost of Linux embracing complexity is a loss of freedom. We must
> all decide personally if we are willing to pay this price or we remain true
> to the principles of GNU/Linux and abandon this type of software.
> At this time w
On 2012/8/18 John Briggs wrote:
> IMHO systemd is unnecessarily complex in trying to do too many separate
> tasks.
I don't understand why you are saying that. The systemd project may be
larger than a small utility, but it is composed of:
* multiple, small utilities that do well knwon and well def
On Sat, 18 Aug 2012 20:11:58 +1000
John Briggs wrote:
As I have said in a previous post, I arrived in linux a little later than you,
but for much the same reasons. On "KISS" / "The Arch Way" / "Unix philosophy"
etc, it seems to me that here as in my own field (law), maxims make good
servants bu
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 01:05:27PM -0500, David C. Rankin wrote:
>
> In all of the discussion about systemd, all anyone should care about is:
>
> (1) Does systemd provide *needed* additional capabilities that are not
> currently available;
>
> (2) What are they?
>
> (3) What are the disadv
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 11:09 AM, mike cloaked wrote:
> True but see my posting in another thread in this mailing list today
> pointing to some rather more useful stats.
>
Actually better than a poll are the comments that appear in:
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=145943
--
mike c
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Heiko Baums wrote:
> Am Fri, 17 Aug 2012 10:20:47 +0100
> schrieb mike cloaked :
>
>> Isn't it interesting that the vote is currently 81% support for arch
>> to switch to systemd (even with the misspelling in the poll), and only
>> 19% against! Looks like at leas
Am Fri, 17 Aug 2012 10:20:47 +0100
schrieb mike cloaked :
> Isn't it interesting that the vote is currently 81% support for arch
> to switch to systemd (even with the misspelling in the poll), and only
> 19% against! Looks like at least from the perspective of this poll
> (even with only 237 vote
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Jérôme Bartand wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Yesterday I read on Phoronix that Arch devs are planning to switch to
> SystemD, but many users are unhappy with this move. You can see a lot of
> controversy discussion on this list. I have created an online poll to
> determine the
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Jérôme Bartand wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Yesterday I read on Phoronix that Arch devs are planning to switch to
> SystemD, but many users are unhappy with this move.
>
It's systemd -- not SystemD. Learn more about it, please:
http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/syst
On Thursday 16 Aug 2012 20:54:21 Ionut Biru wrote:
> with or without this poll, we are continuing with our plan.
+1
--
Cheers and Regards
Jayesh Badwaik
stop html mail | always bottom-post
www.asciiribbon.org | www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 05:23:37PM +, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 07:09:47PM +0200, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
>
> > Also you're poll doesn't give any arguments for or against the move,
> > unedacted users should look into the benefits of moving to systemd.
>
> They should
On 17 Aug 2012 02:05, "David C. Rankin"
wrote:
> In all of the discussion about systemd, all anyone should care about is:
>
> (1) Does systemd provide *needed* additional capabilities that are not
> currently available;
>
> (2) What are they?
>
> (3) What are the disadvantages of the switch?
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 07:09:47PM +0200, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
> Since when is archlinux a democracy?
Yeah, even tho' I hate systemd, even if "no" were winning that poll (which it's
not), I would say that the poll results should not be adhered to. Good
engineering and democracy don't often
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 6:59 PM, phani wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 23:10:38 +0530, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto
> wrote:
>
>> Replace "gold" with "willing and skills to help", and you're right.
>
> what strikes me is that pretty much all who have the skills, do the work,
> and make the decisions in (
On Thursday, August 16, 2012 10:56:25 PM phani wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 22:47:12 +0530, Calvin Morrison
>
> wrote:
> > It's actually more like a business. Often times businesses do polls or
> > statistical information gathering in order to better server their
> > customers.
>
> yeah, but in
1 - 100 of 115 matches
Mail list logo
