XLennart: A Game For Systemd Haters With Nothing Better To Do

[BeardedGNUFreak]

Here's a design suggestion for "systemd" developers, and they can use it "for free"...under GPLv2 terms (they can use it but I still get credit for the idea).

You really think the clowns responsible for the systemd fiasco care what anyone thinks?

How quaint.

[TheBlackCat]

Here's a design suggestion for "systemd" developers, and they can use it "for free"...under GPLv2 terms (they can use it but I still get credit for the idea).

So you are as ignorant of copyright law as you are of systemd. Big surprise there.

[Alejandro Nova]

The fact that all those vitriolic systemd haters, who count themselves by hundreds, haven't managed to coordinate themselves and produce a boot system that can do half of what sysvinit did, speaks a lot about themselves.

[Kemosabe]

From my fstab:

dd-wrt:/opt/nfs         /mnt/router     nfs             defaults,user,rsize=8192,wsize=8192,timeo=14,intr,_netdev,x-systemd.device-timeout=5s,x-systemd.automount,noauto,nolock   0 0 
dd-wrt:/opt/torrent     /mnt/torrent    nfs             defaults,user,rsize=8192,wsize=8192,timeo=14,intr,_netdev,x-systemd.device-timeout=5s,x-systemd.automount,noauto,nolock   0 0

It's mounted on demand (not at boot) and my shutdowns are rocket fast (around 2 secs). Also systemd doesn't want me to use NetworkManager... So don't blame systemd for your weird setups.

I wonder how you managed to insert this in your fstab while youre obviously unable to read.
This approach requires
a) NetworkManager-wait-for-online.service (something similar, its up to you to google)
b) overwrite service files for EACH SINGLE MOUNT

I am tired explaining things over and over again to kids who close their eyes and ears. . . -.-

[MoonMoon]

I wonder how you managed to insert this in your fstab while youre obviously unable to read.
This approach requires
a) NetworkManager-wait-for-online.service (something similar, its up to you to google)
b) overwrite service files for EACH SINGLE MOUNT

I am tired explaining things over and over again to kids who close their eyes and ears. . . -.-

No, it does not. I have a similar line on my laptop and one with the same content on my main machine, only without the automount parts (read: the share is mounted directly at boot). I don't have NetworkManager running and no unit related in any way to NetworkManager is started at boot. I also did not overwrite (or have written from scratch) any systemd or NetworkManager related file for this to work, this stuff all works out of the box.
So you simply have been proven wrong by reality, accusing others of not reading or even belittling them will not help you against facts.

[tuxd3v]

you are free to fuck yourself and use linux without systemd and pulseaudio. noone likes when some morons tell them to stop progress

You are a moron...one of a lot that are out there!!

systemd prevents in a lot of ways the freedom in apps...in that way a massive amount of app's have to implement it or depend on it indirectly...so in that way yes...systemd prevents freedom on users, and is because of this software crap violation of the citizen freedom that the people are against...

Not direclty because some crazy kid have done a software programm crap...

its not against the ideia of someone is doing it...any body can do software...I myself to it...the problem is when you design software in a vendor lockin...and the major structures start to use it...then avarybody realizes that, they get their freedom away...

thanks red hat for that...great move!

[MoonMoon]

You are a moron...one of a lot that are out there!!

systemd prevents in a lot of ways the freedom in apps...in that way a massive amount of app's have to implement it or depend on it indirectly...so in that way yes...systemd prevents freedom on users, and is because of this software crap violation of the citizen freedom that the people are against...

Not direclty because some crazy kid have done a software programm crap...

its not against the ideia of someone is doing it...any body can do software...I myself to it...the problem is when you design software in a vendor lockin...and the major structures start to use it...then avarybody realizes that, they get their freedom away...

thanks red hat for that...great move!

So because systemd provides functionality that is useful to other projects and at this point not provided by any other maintained project it is somehow designed with vendor lock in? That is a funny kind of logic. In the same way you could claim that the kernel is at fault because it is the only kernel that provides functionality needed for implementing systemd the way it is now. Or that Qt is designed with a vendor lock in, since KDE can not simply switch to GTK (or GTK has a lock in since GNOME can not simply switch to Qt). You get the idea, I hope.

Anyways, if you want to call this a vendor lock in, there is an easy way to break it: stop complaining and start coding, simply create a project that provides similar functionality, so that other projects can make use of it. But be aware not to extent that functionality with useful features, you might be accused of creating a vendor lock in with that.

[tuxd3v]

So because systemd provides functionality that is useful to other projects and at this point not provided by any other maintained project it is somehow designed with vendor lock in? That is a funny kind of logic. In the same way you could claim that the kernel is at fault because it is the only kernel that provides functionality needed for implementing systemd the way it is now. Or that Qt is designed with a vendor lock in, since KDE can not simply switch to GTK (or GTK has a lock in since GNOME can not simply switch to Qt). You get the idea, I hope.

Anyways, if you want to call this a vendor lock in, there is an easy way to break it: stop complaining and start coding, simply create a project that provides similar functionality, so that other projects can make use of it. But be aware not to extent that functionality with useful features, you might be accused of creating a vendor lock in with that.

You are wrong!

You are trying to deceive us...its the only answer to your post..

Gnome cant use QT, and KDE can use GTK...who tould you otherwise...besides, this is not even comparable!!

systemd obrigates you to depend on a lot of tools ,ad crap software, that will turn you after in a vendor lock in position, that's is the truth about it!!
It was made by...of course a vendor lock in company Red Hat!!
Ĩt's is good for Red Hat?
Ofcourse, is the best solution...but for the rest of the people is the worst, because you will face vendor lock in!

The mantainers chooses it??
NO, the people where forced to use it...because they cannot support a lot of init systems, and SO they opt only for systemd...this is not freddom!!
A mantainer, that is smart, will try to fullfill the requirements of all the people, in that way, that app will be in more machines...but because systemd is vendor lock in...to suport others init systems, they will have a HUGE work to do...so they say that simply will not support more than one init system...

Why systemd doesn't rely on some api,or something that is standardized to all??
Why he tries to be a operating system...because systemd, today is not a init system.

I don't understand why you are comparing the kernel linux with systemd...in this way seesm that you agree with me in turning systemd in a specie os operating system?!

I can use the kernel linux with my tools...but I CAN'T use linux+my init system+ my tools...because my tools rely on systemd OS crap!!

The developrs of systemd has the right to create it?
Of course they have the right...!!

Should DEBIAN OS choose it?
NOOO, the fredom of DEBIAN OPERATING SYSTEM PROJECT is affected with it, so it hurts debian culture, and the user in general...obviously, it should not be in DEBIAN OS PROJECT!!

[somini]

So because systemd provides functionality that is useful to other projects and at this point not provided by any other maintained project it is somehow designed with vendor lock in? That is a funny kind of logic. In the same way you could claim that the kernel is at fault because it is the only kernel that provides functionality needed for implementing systemd the way it is now. Or that Qt is designed with a vendor lock in, since KDE can not simply switch to GTK (or GTK has a lock in since GNOME can not simply switch to Qt). You get the idea, I hope.

Anyways, if you want to call this a vendor lock in, there is an easy way to break it: stop complaining and start coding, simply create a project that provides similar functionality, so that other projects can make use of it. But be aware not to extent that functionality with useful features, you might be accused of creating a vendor lock in with that.

Why stop there? GNU is a threat to freedom because they release their glibc under a GPL licence!

[brosis]

You are wrong!

You are trying to deceive us...its the only answer to your post..

Gnome cant use QT, and KDE can use GTK...who tould you otherwise...besides, this is not even comparable!!

systemd obrigates you to depend on a lot of tools ,ad crap software, that will turn you after in a vendor lock in position, that's is the truth about it!!
It was made by...of course a vendor lock in company Red Hat!!
Ĩt's is good for Red Hat?
Ofcourse, is the best solution...but for the rest of the people is the worst, because you will face vendor lock in!

The mantainers chooses it??
NO, the people where forced to use it...because they cannot support a lot of init systems, and SO they opt only for systemd...this is not freddom!!
A mantainer, that is smart, will try to fullfill the requirements of all the people, in that way, that app will be in more machines...but because systemd is vendor lock in...to suport others init systems, they will have a HUGE work to do...so they say that simply will not support more than one init system...

Why systemd doesn't rely on some api,or something that is standardized to all??
Why he tries to be a operating system...because systemd, today is not a init system.

I don't understand why you are comparing the kernel linux with systemd...in this way seesm that you agree with me in turning systemd in a specie os operating system?!

I can use the kernel linux with my tools...but I CAN'T use linux+my init system+ my tools...because my tools rely on systemd OS crap!!

The developrs of systemd has the right to create it?
Of course they have the right...!!

Should DEBIAN OS choose it?
NOOO, the fredom of DEBIAN OPERATING SYSTEM PROJECT is affected with it, so it hurts debian culture, and the user in general...obviously, it should not be in DEBIAN OS PROJECT!!

Lol!
It must hurt by a lot to be forced to use SysV init, and BSD init, and HAL then udev! Who are they to force this upon you!
Nah, build a tent, write your own systemd, come back and present it as a systemd replacement, because RH must have agenda, but you - never.

Do you know why Linux is so retarded? Because it keeps fighting over view angles, constantly breaking the base. No standartisation, no development programs which must compete together to determine the right to get as next standard.

If you are writing your own, say finance management software and that dude over the wire does same, you can boast and fight which software is better and how much choice there is in the end.
But when your aunt enters and says she needs finance management software, you two will tear each others throats, whilst she will leave and pick something that most people say is good.

And you will never achieve anything good, because you are busy tearing your own throats instead of tearing keyboards and presenting quantitative values.

My system starts at 1/10 of the time, hibernates effortlessly, init scripts are easy to write. That alone makes me use systemd. You want some "freedom" as in ability to do ANYTHING? - go hack out systemd. Like a kiddie writing on walls with markers, and yelling of disallowed. Or you want some "freedom" as in ability to express self without producing chaos - then go invent something better than systemd and present quantative results.