Example, libvirt doesn't use
/etc/network/interfaces is Debian-specific. Libvirt (optionally) supports the netcf library, which is a cross-platform network configuration library that claims to support Debian. Is libvirt in Debian compiled against netcf?
And it insists on running its own copies of dnsmasq, rather than just dropping some files in
Have you filed a bug?
So because Debian has bugs in their 'upgrade-to-syatemd' process in their in-development release, which numerous other Linux distros (Red Hat/Fedora, SUSE, Arch, Mageia) *don't* have in their released versions, your reaction is to ditch your distro?
Wow.
Maybe you shouldn't have been running testing
So, you don't have kids.
Have you actually looked at any of these shell scripts? The largest one in F14 is less that 400 lines and they are all straight forward to read. Where is the tangled mess and when have they ever not worked for you?
RHEL6:
$ wc -l
662
RHEL5:
$ wc -l
980
This is what systemd actually *replaces*.
its adoption will force a *lot* of people who don't want it to either suffer through it or suffer through migration to another OS. That is reason enough not to adopt it.
How is it something to 'suffer through'. Read a man page or two, and you should be able to admin it and gain the benefits it provides (eg. cgroups configured by default).
Running systemd on all my personal machines and my workstation at the office, I haven't experiened any problems. We'll be upgrading systems in the coming months, and I see no reason to avoid systemd.
it's the dependencies thats a real problem.
Which dependencies exactly? About the only new dependency vs. the previous init system on this distro is: dbus
There are separate projects out there that literally do every single thing systemd does without making it un modular and non posix compliant and have code that is readable.
Please provide a link or a name for one project that has at least all of the useful functionality that systemd has.
Then you have some major projects like gnome where are going to require systemd. Its not a big deal for BSD though. some developers are almost done with systembsd which emulates systemd without actually installing it allowing the depend software to be used without inheriting things like PAM for authentication and other things that are not liked and not actually giving control of the system over to it.
And GNOME developers will just ignore any bugs related to functionality not available on BSD and just stubbed in systembsd
I have systemd on all of my personal linux boxes (my laptop, wife's laptop, media player, NAS), and it hasn't introduced any issues while resulting in all machines booting faster and provided many more features.
(it has network connections, so in theory, it can be remote rooted)
[root@buchan-laptop ~]# ps auxww|grep systemd|wc -l
12
[root@buchan-laptop ~]# netstat -plant|grep systemd
[root@buchan-laptop ~]#
No consumer broadband ISP promises raw bandwidth without prioritisation on their cheapest ($/GB, $/Mbps) prices.
Why? Because it's impossible to ensure everyone can get DNS responses while 20% of the users are flooding the network with as many P2P packets as they can.
DPI doesn't need to berak SSL. Most broadband networks use DPI for managing traffic, and you don't get certificate validation problems when watching youtube.
Most Network Engineers I know work with routers, switches, load balancers and firewalls, and want to run the latest Cisco/Juniper etc. and haven't worked in detail with DPI-based traffic management solutions, so they still think you need to MITM the traffic to identify it.
This is taken from a production DPI-based traffic management device for my traffic while the kids are watching youtube on XBMC (still need to upgrade to Kodi), and clearly shows that youtube on port 443 is easily identified.
(Tried to paste it here, but the filter keeps telling me to use fewer junk characters, even after I removed all brackets, plus signs etc.)
The internet has never been a two-sided market where services have to pay for access to people that want to use them.
There are a number of ISPs in other countries which implemented the 'sponsored bandwidth' model a few years ago already, where the content costs more than the delivery, and to assuage concerns from users (in most cases users on Mobile data) about out-of-bundle costs, the content distributor pays for the bandwidth so that the user can be at ease in using large volumes of traffic to consume the content.
Net Neutrality means that the traffic comes through unimpeded, not everyone gets the same.
No, it doesn't mean that, it means "all traffic (and in some variations, of the same type) should be impeded to the same degree"
Someone who pays for 20Mbit, gets close to 20Mbit someone who pays for 40Mbit gets close to 40Mbit.
Whether you get the speed you pay for or not (assuming all traffic is as fast or slow) is unrelated to Net Neutrality.
It's how each user chooses to use their XXMbit bandwidth that is the focus of net neutrality.
No. It may be about whether the ISP can influence how the user chooses to use their bandwidth or not, and to what degree.
Preventing AT&T or Verizon from throttling Netflix or VOIP services to eek out more money.
Ah, yes, *this* is a Net Neutrality issue.
But, Net Neutrality rules won't fix all the silly problems you Americans have because of lack of competition. Requiring all access network operators to allow ISPs to use capacity on their networks (see IP Connect, IP Stream etc.) to drive competition would probably solve all of the problems.
Sure, but now we are already talking about paid professional developers. My criticism was directed to the original claim which was that the end-user can fix the bugs.
No, the original claim was:
"at least the end-user isn't restricted from fixing bugs when they occur."
Paying/getting a different party to fix the bug is a valid application of "not being restricted from fixing the bug". In the case of proprietary software, if the original vendor doesn't fix it, you're stuck with the choice of being vulnerable or making significant changes (switching to a different proprietary software).
Seems a bit silly to store the details you need to access the internet (in the case you router dies) only accessible when you have working internet access. Maybe you should store just those details somewhere you can access without the internet?
And the wireless network name. And the wireless network username+password.
And then, I have to do it all again in two minutes when you walk out of range. And then again when you get home. And then again at a cafe.
NM might not be the nicest of things, but it sure beats the hell out of running several commands every time I relocate myself/my laptop.
You really haven't had to do it that way since 2004.
$ man wpa_supplicant.conf
Work continues in this area. -- DEC's SPR-Answering-Automaton
