On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 18:37:04 +0200, Oliver Grawert wrote: >i havent called anything transparent, you have called "the boot process >a mess" and pointed to pointless proof
I was speaking about transparency and I called the absence of transparency a mess. Your claim is, that it isn't a mess, so the conclusion in this context is, that you claim it's transparent, clear. Please quote me were I mentioned the boot process. I could say something about the boot process, but this would be more off-topic. One keyword could be "race conditions", another keyword perhaps "documentation". On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 18:22:52 +0200, Oliver Grawert wrote: >as i understand it the introduction of systemctl was to overcome the >fragmentation of managing services in different distros so that you >dont have a debian way, and ubuntu way or a fedora way (i.e. chkconfig) >anymore. There is the filesystem hierarchy standard, but within this standard Linux distros differ a lot. It's more important to know were the files are, instead of having one command. As long as the files are human readable files, dash or bash scripts and we know the locations, it's not so hard to use different distros with different init systems. Mixing systemd with init scripts, the issue with the locations increases. Btw. one of the few good features of systemd is systemd-nspawn, but unfortunately I noticed that this sometimes fails. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss