If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Linux Kernel Developers Fed Up With Ridiculous Bugs In Systemd
Yes, an article devoid of concrete detail. An article that says systemd can't be restarted and then mentions how to restart systemd. An article that shows a minimal init, while completely ignoring the complexity and fragility of the scripts framework you have to put on top of that init to actually have it do something.
So you'll have to be sayin' more than just pointing out that link, which I'm sure has been mentioned in this thread already.
Putting something on a web page doesn't automatically make it true.
Sure, unless of course, if the web-page was put up by one-sided "systemd-fanboys" heaping glorious, (but obviously misplaced) praise for systemd, then that would be "true" too,
right !?
Yes, an article devoid of concrete detail. An article that says systemd can't be restarted and then mentions how to restart systemd. An article that shows a minimal init, while completely ignoring the complexity and fragility of the scripts framework you have to put on top of that init to actually have it do something.
So you'll have to be sayin' more than just pointing out that link, which I'm sure has been mentioned in this thread already.
"...ignoring the complexity and fragility of the scripts framework..." - that so-called foundation(of simple init scripts) has been in place, and has worked flawlessly for over 30 years, in the "real" unix/linux world.
Your "systemd", has to learn to curb their arrogance and admit their mistakes, and then FIX they're buggy crap, or else.
Cause nobody wants a potential "systemd" heartbleed, ...
Systemd is simply a "tool" to make a "dev's" programming world easier to manage, and unfortunately "control", with their binary-non-portable bloberia
-sadly their isn;t anything more about it, except the obvous UN-needed complexity of itself. -get it ?
,,, and sorry clyde, but that link is the first here, in this thread, -don't like it? then don't read it, and continue pretending it's all wrong.
Systemd is simply a "tool" to make a "dev's" programming world easier to manage, and unfortunately "control", with their binary-non-portable bloberia
-sadly their isn;t anything more about it, except the obvous UN-needed complexity of itself. -get it ?
Yes, I get that you're making some vague unsubstantiated claims that might sound good to you, but are completely devoid of any substance. I'm surprised you didn't put a RedHat/NSA conspiracy theory in there while you were at it.
There are a lot of sysadmins who would take a big exception to that "flawlessly" claim.
1./ -> Or else you'll write another ranty comment on a forum?
2./ ->Yes, I get that you're making some vague unsubstantiated claims that might sound good to you, but are completely devoid of any substance. I'm surprised you didn't put a RedHat/NSA conspiracy theory in there while you were at it.
3./ ->And here you enter the WTF territory. There's no head or tail to this sentence, it makes no sense whatsoever. So... WTF??
?
---------------------------------------
(1./)- On the contrary, you're wrong, right now, there is a lot of sysadmins, who most evidently, don't even "care" about systenD'uih. To them. it's about "ADMISTERING", with full control, the machine simply. it was about "KISS", but now it's about control.
Future sysadmins will decide how viable/controllable systemd really is, if they even have a freekin' chioce ?!
Until then, as now, it's not so user-freindly is it?, in fact, it's NOT even "Linus" freindly right now. ?
BTW -you have no legitimate proof whatsover, regarding the maojority of what unix-sysadmins views on systmed are, as nor I,
but since you brought it up, I might as well counter with the same amount of legitamacy.
-grow-up man.
Systemd devs, WILL get over their ego's, and they(Kay, ... whoever) WILL work, (with Linus), to FIX their issues. I guess I said that too harshly before ?
(2./)- truth is, you need to get over yourself, and the fact that systemd is far from perferct, yet, if ever? Did I mention "RedHat/NSA conspiracy theory.." -NO, did I mention the "IBM/Windowization of Redhat" ? -NO, did I mention ....? -categorically NO>
in fact, you did, not me.
(3/) uhh ok, well wtf, here it is again, in case you purposely misread my link, the first time: http://ewontfix.com/14/
The truth is, systemd needs to be more "accountable" and fix their own buggy-crap,
and you sir, need to stop deep-throating the folks of systemd so much.
Be a little more "Open"-minded and fair, like I am.
Be a little more "Open"-minded and fair, like I am.
Yeah...
I could write something more, but those quotes speak for themselves. You have nothing. Just rants, insults and ad-hominems. The last thing you have is "open-mindedness".
I could write something more, but those quotes speak for themselves. You have nothing. Just rants, insults and ad-hominems. The last thing you have is "open-mindedness".
Well, that's atleast better than "open-mindLESSness"
-did u hear me now ?
Sure, unless of course, if the web-page was put up by one-sided "systemd-fanboys" heaping glorious, (but obviously misplaced) praise for systemd, then that would be "true" too,
right !?
-Well, then it goes "both" ways sunshine.
jus' sayin'.
1. I'm not your sunshine.
2. Sure, you always have to consider who is writing and if this person is in a position to say something sensible on the very topic.
Comment