Comment Re:Pretty Lame Selection (Score 1) 209
...but so was the F-104 and *that* one gets included in a lot of "best planes ever" lists.
Now that really is a joke. The F-104 was an absolute killer.
...but so was the F-104 and *that* one gets included in a lot of "best planes ever" lists.
Now that really is a joke. The F-104 was an absolute killer.
Anyone who equates someone who accepts DRM with someone who accepts the systematic slaughter of an entire people by the state needs to have their sense of proportion adjusted.
Alas, the world is not black and white and is various shaded of grey. Once you start accepting something history tells you it then becomes and ever so slightly steeper slope.
Don't freak out over strong analogies or because someone uses a particular word.
It is a stunt that will land you in jail.
A stunt that will end in the Firefox browser refusing to install or communicate with any unauthorized extensions.
Yer, like this hasn't been done before and like that's put people off doing such things in the past. We all know this is going to happen.
When I see a statement like that I think to myself - why.
The fact that you have to even ask that means that you will never get it. When you have an init process that feels the need to do a whole lot more you have several times the bugs, and this is a system you're relying on to boot a system - which you're then going to have to troubleshoot. As a system administrator it fills me with absolute dread.
I really seems to me that getting rid of that horrible kludge of shellscripts and moving towards a standardised and sensible startup process is a big step forwards in Linux land.
Shell scripts are human readable, they work and they stand independently so if something fails, most of the time, it won't affect anything else. In a systemd system you won't have the faintest idea what s going to happen. There is no reason a more sane init system could not be developed that used human readable scripts and logs, and we certainly don't need systemd to get there.
Those who don't know Unix are doomed to re-create it, poorly.
As simple as that, basically.
If the author find real bugs and truly disruptive design choice in systemd he should do as any good open source citizen: report it. This has already been done recently for the "debug" command line switch controversy.
They have been reported, and in true fashion they are dismissed in that passive aggressive style that has become oh, so familiar. The comments section of that article makes that clear and it makes it clear that those behind systemd have no idea how a Unix style system should work, and why. Hint: Poorly documented, bullshit XML schemas have no place anywhere near there. Linus, Ingo Molnar and Ted Tso have all made their positions crystal clear on the style and maintainership of that piece of software and the people behind it. As Ted Tso put it:
...one of the reasons why this happens is because +Kay Sievers and +Lennart Poettering often have the same response style to criticisms as the +GNOME developers --- go away, you're clueless, we know better than you, and besides, we have commit privs and you don't, so go away.
So, please stop using that pathetic 'Report it' excuse. It will make no difference and we all know it won't.
This has already been done recently for the "debug" command line switch controversy.
You're not honestly trying to suggest that that bug report was solved in anyway approaching a satisfactory manner, are you?
The net effect of this is someone, probably a bunch of kernel developers, are going to have to get hold of this shit and sort it out by writing a proper and sane init system because userspace is getting totally out of hand.
Actually, you are arbitrarily declaring it "needless complexity," when what you mean is "this is new and I don't understand it, so I hate it." The reality is it is quite a bit simpler in a number of ways. Whether or not it is on a remote server is irrelevant.
No, it is needless complexity and it is NOT simpler in a lot of ways - not by a long stretch. systemd incorporates a lot of functions that have long been separate and focused. Troubleshooting this monolithic system, and even reading its logs, is a quantum leap harder to do so do not presume to tell me what the 'reality' is in the manner that its maintainers tend to do. I administrate servers where I require a working init system, that's the reality.
Why? That is a meaningless rebuttal.
Because it's meaningless? You've put the word 'enterprise' in there and expect it to mean something. Sorry, but it doesn't. Logs that I can read at a low level are critical for an 'enterprise' infrastructure. I've been through that with Windows.
But at least there's an upside for me: I don't have to deal with the systemd maintainers' excessively passive-aggressive behavior
There is nothing ambiguous about that.
But then you have to provide some way for the system to decide which USER is allowed to "f***ing start" each service.
No I don't, and never have done.
The best things in life go on sale sooner or later.
