Systemd Dreams Up New Feature, Makes It Like Cron

[funkSTAR]

Those thousands of man hours are worth it. It provides us with a diverse choice of what fits our needs best.

Yeah? You and which army? While the original maintainers take their code to the systemd tree there nothing you can do about. Well maybe you can gather 100 moronix mobsters and you can fork everything, do unsynchronized releases, add 100 distro specifc patches and try to maintain binary compatibility between 5 kernels, 3 init systems, HAL and alot of other shit out there. GOOD LUCK, but the rest of the world moves to CoreOS. bye!

[pingufunkybeat]

Yeah? You and which army? While the original maintainers take their code to the systemd tree there nothing you can do about. Well maybe you can gather 100 moronix mobsters and you can fork everything, do unsynchronized releases, add 100 distro specifc patches and try to maintain binary compatibility between 5 kernels, 3 init systems, HAL and alot of other shit out there. GOOD LUCK, but the rest of the world moves to CoreOS. bye!

Funky, have you ever actually written a line of code? I'm curious.

[funkSTAR]

Funky, have you ever actually written a line of code? I'm curious.

The only question is which order of magnitude you will add to the one line? You can go non-decimal if you want to play it geek-cool Make your bet.

[duby229]

The only question is which order of magnitude you will add to the one line? You can go non-decimal if you want to play it geek-cool Make your bet.

huh?......

[funkSTAR]

huh?......

Mind your own business. You can spend this and your next ten lives maintaining out of tree shit nobody cares about anymore.

[duby229]

Mind your own business. You can spend this and your next ten lives maintaining out of tree shit nobody cares about anymore.

Considering that more people are working on infrastructure without sysd than with, I'm pretty sure more people care than you think.

Of course that all just depends on how much do you think.....

[Ericg]

They only work on linux and can't support other kernels.

Fsck other kernels. Systemd isnt SUPPOSED to support other kernels. It uses linux-specific features to bring up linux systems. If *BSD wants systemd then they can implement cgroups and any other feature needed by systemd.

Where is the sanity or the reliability or the standardization? I don't see anything like that.

Sanity? It tosses indecipherable shell-scripts out the window.
Reliability? Have you used it recently? Originally it had some bugs, sure, but systemd had brought systems up and down without problems since F17's release.
Standardization? It means no more pointless differences in distros configuration files.

[pingufunkybeat]

The only question is which order of magnitude you will add to the one line? You can go non-decimal if you want to play it geek-cool Make your bet.

High school computer class doesn't count.

I'm waging 3 lines of code (after removing empty lines and braces).

That's decimal, btw.

[duby229]

Fsck other kernels. Systemd isnt SUPPOSED to support other kernels. It uses linux-specific features to bring up linux systems. If *BSD wants systemd then they can implement cgroups and any other feature needed by systemd.



Sanity? It tosses indecipherable shell-scripts out the window.
Reliability? Have you used it recently? Originally it had some bugs, sure, but systemd had brought systems up and down without problems since F17's release.
Standardization? It means no more pointless differences in distros configuration files.

Sanity? Shell scripting is a very powerful tool that shouldnt be thrown out the window.. That is definitely insane to do so.
Reliability? Sure if your running a system that has all the .system files that is needed. But what happens when you install something that doesnt? It happens alot. Not to mention all of the compatibilty problems that is still has. Hell apache2 still doesnt have a reliable .system file.
Standardization? It doesnt work on every distro even still, and then it doesnt work on every hardware that older init system could,. It doesnt work on every kernel that older ones could.

So it removes capability, adds bloat that would be better served as independant subsystems, decreases compatibility, and has more bugs than alternatives... I still don't see the point.

I wouldnt call it a waste of time, clearly there are people who like it better, but it more or less removes redhat and its kin from being used. And also dissappointingly enough even arch.. I liked arch, but this ruined it for me.

[johnc]

Welcome to a meritocracy man. Those who do the work get to decide the direction.

Well there are certainly companies that do a lot of "work" that would be considered merited, but aren't necessarily foisting their work onto the Linux community as a defacto standard. I'm thinking in particular of Google. Not to mention it's not always clear if things are being accepted based on "merits" or other reasons (e.g., politics, etc.).

As concerned as we are about software freedom and all that, I'd think people would be at least a bit tentative about having Linux consolidate around 1 or 2 companies. I mean I'm not crazy to think there's a certain risk there, am I?