Originally posted by gens
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Using Udev Without Systemd Is Going To Become Harder
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by erendorn View PostAre you really suggesting that the world would have been better if developers statically linked ssl libraries, or even mixed their code? and that it would be easier to fix?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Awesomeness View PostSo what?
Gentooers had it coming they way they acted before?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Delgarde View PostNot better, but possibly easier. Modularity sounds great in theory, having lots of small well-tested components - until you realise that those components make up about 10% of the codebase, and that the remaining 90% is the bit that glues them all together. Like most things, it's a balancing act - far more complex than just "modular is good, monolithic is bad".
Comment
-
Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View PostOnly if you're designing it wrong. Designed right you end up in a situation where you have a proper separation of concerns and as a result maintenance and extension become trivial, even if the initial writing of it took more time, you're saving a lot more time in the long run.
See, don't get me wrong - modularity is a useful tool. But all that extra structure that goes with it - that's extra complexity, and you pay the price for having it.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Vim_User View PostYeah, let's happy generalize and convict all Gentoo users. Seriously, start thinking before posting at least sometimes, this is not only affecting Gentoo users, but all distributions that don't want to use systemd.
Comment
-
Originally posted by bkor View PostWtf? Don't change my words! I was talking about API and lots of components. Wtf does that have to do with static linking? If you have many small parts, each with their own APIs, you limit yourself in what you can do. E.g. openssl has a bad API, and cannot easily be changed. Static linking or dynamic linking has nothing to do with the API. I'm also not suggesting that openssl should be included in the various projects, that's impossible.
What people are suggesting is that everything should be modular. So that means adding loads more APIs, each with their own stability guarantees. Increases complexity. Openssl is just an example, don't put so much effort into misunderstanding me.
Then, yes, if there is no code reuse (by other projects), it can save a bit of complexity to do less modularity (but you'll reduce encapsulation/independence, difficult to say if it will actually reduce efforts). But if there is no code reuse (or you don't officially support it), you can keep the modularity, just with zero stability guarantee. You'll lose some optimizations, but still usually positive impact.
Comment
-
Previous news: The Linux Kernel Might Use FreeBSD's Capsicum Security Framework
- 1 Comment
Subsequent news: The First Alpha Is Out Of The Qt5 Moonlight Desktop
- 1 Comment
This one: Using Udev Without Systemd Is Going To Become Harder
- 86 Comments
Lennart - the source of your voice.
Comment
-
Originally posted by liam View PostAh, I'd no idea you were an adolescent. Pardon the post.
(either Erich K?stner or Tin Ujević, don't know)
anyway, you are pardoned
@Arch; at least it keeps Phoronix goingLast edited by gens; 08 July 2014, 03:27 AM.
Comment
Comment