1. Easy ability to do dependency management.
Debian has a script or script library I believe originally from the lsb which does this easily from some boilerplate at the top of the init script. That's how update-rc.d works, but it's also used to make init scripts require that other scripts have started successfully.
2. Ability to start services in parallel (which flows from 1).
startpar
3. Remove the necessity for every service to write its own daemonization code; you can just let systemd do it for you.
daemontools, inetd...
4. Standard way to run services as a non-root user
Funny thing about standards.
5. Standard way to use newer Linux features like cgroups and namespaces.
There already were standard ways to do this in the shell, and therefore in init scripts. They are even already used.
6. Standard commands for monitoring and controlling the status of a service.
That's always been a part of init scripts.
All of those things can be (and probably have been) implemented in sysvinit environments, but usually as hacks.
All of those things are available in a standard Devuan install right now. And they were available in a standard Debian install before they adopted systemd, too.
Second: If you say: "We considered it carefully, we debated it at length, and we rejected it.", then why is it that most Linux systems use systemd, Solaris uses smf, and Mac OS uses launchd, all of which are systemd-like things?
All of those things are reviled to various degrees.
sysvinit's only crimes were that it was slow and you had to write scripts. startpar solved the slow problem and scripts are an integral and fundamental feature of the OS, and avoiding them is missing the point. Init scripts are made with skeletons and boilerplate and just aren't that complicated anyway.
There have been Linux distributions which used the BSD init script system. It's just inferior to doing it the System V way, which is yet still basically the same thing as the BSD way — after all, it's only shell scripts being run in a predetermined order.
Because it involves him being an Israeli asset. How does an non-credentialed private school teacher with a history of poor performance and allegations of misconduct with the young ladies move into the financial sector with Bear Stearns and immediately begin making tens of millions of dollars? They don't.
One must never question the methods or the motives of our greatest ally, or they will be branded an antisemite and made a pariah of polite society, the one that's cool with turning predominately women and children, and unarmed men who occupy a densely populated open air prison camp into bits and pieces using our tax dollars.
Well, after using an iPhone, I tried an Android. I found it to be confusing and baroque.
You've been around a while, and you are not ignorant when it comes to computers, and yet people who are completely ignorant about computers (and generally incompetent at life) have no problem using Android. The obvious conclusion is that you are exaggerating the problems you had for rhetorical effect.
But to castigate people who choose iPhones as 'sheep' or other pejorative judgements is disgusting to me.
People who don't know better may be excused, but you have intentionally chosen to be locked in the garden. You disgust me in that way.
I honestly don't understand the visceral hate for systemd.
It is the antithesis of the Unix way. This has been argued back and forth all along, and if you don't agree I won't try to convince you here.
Systemd, at least in my experience, just works and writing systemd unit files is easier than writing sysvinit scripts. So when Debian switched to it, it was fine. I adapted.
The problem with systemd and unit scripts is that they cannot do all the things that a script can do, so you often wind up using a script anyway. In that case you have really not made things any simpler than the usual case. Meanwhile you've added a whole lot of complexity which is largely unnecessary, some of which is utterly dependent on other parts so it is difficult to impossible to switch out portions of it, and much of which doesn't work very well. systemd is arguably better at typical run time logging but is worse at early boot logging, which is what got me to drop it. I was having problems with root on zfs on Debian, which had been working, and I couldn't tell what had happened without a debugger. So I switched to Devuan.
In fact I just did a fresh install of Devuan excalibur (Debian trixie) with root on zfs from the trixie instructions on the openzfs site, where I had a dumb problem with grub which I solved in a hacky way by dropping a script into grub.d (the script which creates the root= part of the cmdline doesn't detect the pool the root volume is on correctly) and also had to do an init script in place of their
When Debian switched to systemd, I adapted. I switched to Devuan.
Poettering will also continue to remain deeply involved in the systemd ecosystem.
I therefore trust that it will continue to be shit.
Not needing a pantograph but needing isolators between rail segments is just trading one problem for another. Pantographs aren't cheap, but they are simple in principle and highly reliable.
Or, and just hear me out on this one. People like the product?
That's a hypothesis, but it doesn't explain the change. There is nothing particularly interesting in the current iPhone lineup (one phone is thin, one phone is powerful, one phone is cheap, etc). Of course, carrier subsidization scams aren't new either, so they don't explain the growth.
Somehow they managed to open a new market or market segment somewhere, but it's not clear how.
"A GTA5 style game, set in star trek TNG's world". You spawn on the streets of a scifi san fransisco, steal the shuttle Galileo, fly it into orbit, warp to deep space 9, and blow up the station. A
The concept is cool, but I'm afraid the gameplay would have as much interest as the prompt. That is, the game itself would only be fun for a few minutes.
It isn't his fault, it is his mothers. but interesting that you support the fraud.
The SSA is using people who are not medical professionals to make what are effectively medical determinations. This is ever so much bullshit. People can appeal with the same facts (documentation etc) and have a much higher approval rate when they do, and then they have a yet higher approval rate if they employ a disability lawyer (who takes a portion of their back benefits as payment.)
I am very much not supporting fraud, I am saying that the people whose job it is to stop the fraud from occurring in the first place (as there is no benefit fraud unless you are receiving benefits) are not only not doing their jobs, they are fundamentally unqualified to do their jobs. What's better than detecting fraud is preventing it. And those same people are also denying claims that they should be granting, because the chance of success goes up on appeal even without employing legal counsel.
Am I happy about false claims? No, not if they are occurring. But unless you know who's getting what benefits for what reason, which you don't unless you have read the notices of action, award letters etc., I don't have any reason to believe that there is in fact any fraud. I do however know for sure that the SSA is doing work the employees are not qualified to do.
Take phones for example. The average person does not know about alternatives, and their bank app wouldn't run there anyway, so they have no choice but to plug in to one or another platform that wants to milk them in some way. I chose to have my bank app work myself.
I don't just buy everything that's thrown at me, either. But many people don't enjoy the choice I've got.
In Nature there are neither rewards nor punishments, there are consequences. -- R.G. Ingersoll
