Comment Re:UNIX Philosophy (Score 1) 555
Systemd even has a shutdownd. I'm pretty sure it does one thing and does it well.
Systemd even has a shutdownd. I'm pretty sure it does one thing and does it well.
This isnt a thought or a prediction, this is something systemd actually does when it takes NTP, console, logging, and networking and forces them into one application.
Except it's not.
My system is too old so I don't have the consoled on it, but I imagine that will be a separate daemon as well.
the fork threat is to be taken seriously because of the leaderships inability to actually recognize this as a massive security, scalability, and overall functionality problem that was steamrolled into debian largely at the behest of KDE and Gnome devs. The best solution to avoid a fork in my opinion is to give the user something thats also been forgotten about in the linux community: choice. Systemd or RC Init, or uselessd (a fork of systemd that tries to rehabilitate systemd)
That would of course be nice. But someone has to do the work. It's not like it's just a matter of flipping a bit and everything just works. You actually need to go in and make sure that stuff works with all of them.
http://forkfedora.org/
Not really, but well made.
If systemd really was a bad thing then distributions would not choose it. It's amazing that people think that distributions are dictated which init system to use.
I see. It appears that Android is not as easy to customize as I thought, that you could just replace individual components like the UI if you wanted.
What's so painful about systemd? Seriously.
Android didn't need a new design overhaul. I just hope the new OS is fast and functional.
I heard Android is open source. Why don't you change it back if you like it better that way?
The part that I don't like (besides it going against the unix philosophy) is how fast it's taking over before the majority of the Linux community even had a chance to have their say. And what really gets me is, if systemd was just an init system, fine. But at the rate they are going there is going to be a systemd everything.
Distributions are free to choose whichever init system they want to support. A lot of them choose systemd because it is better than everything that came before it. As simple as that. There is no big conspiracy going on. It's better, that's why it's used. Get over it.
Lennart does not decide what init system distributions choose to use. Distributions choose systemd because it is better than all that came before it.
It already works that way. If you build systemd with all features enabled you end up with something like 70 binaries or so.
That's why distributions support their releases for some time, 5-10 years usually depending on the distribution. If you give it some time these bugs that you think of will go away. I have not run into them, I guess I'm lucky.
Remember this before ranting too much on Lennart. He is not in any position to force any distribution to do anything. Distributions choose to use his software because it actually is better than the stuff that came before it.
Really? For most users all systemd means is that there are some new commands that you can use if you want. Not a big deal at all.
Because a lot of software depend on Systemd, and it's quite handy to use the stuff that software depends on when you want to put it in your distribution.
This happens every time something happens. Some people always hate everything.
If you think the system is working, ask someone who's waiting for a prompt.
