Re: OT: complaints about systemd

On 10 October 2014 12:40, Michael <[email protected]> wrote:

> At this point, think about architectures. (Thanks heaven we're a little
> more on topic now ;)
>
> Especially Debian tries to support many architectures, at least as good as
> resources provide.
>
> Lennarts Operating System Troll (LOST) resulting in DLL (Distributor-Less
> Linux) woul probably remove support for the minor archs. The 'linux app'
> market places replacing Distributors won't take responsibility for such a
> difficult time-consuming task, and the developers themselves certainly
> won't do it either. I can't see any solution to this problem. The diversity
> of archs may simply vanish, in last consequence.
>
> Well, Poettering probably sees this as as a pro.
>
> Along the existing distribution framework, a great deal of community will
> vanish too.
>
> But distributions are a place where concerned people meet and talk, and
> work collaboratively. It's also a good starting point for developer
> newcomers. And IMHO those 'superfluous' meetings about questions of whom to
> support, where to go, or ideals and ideas like freedom in general, are a
> core part of the whole thing.


If the implications of SystemD turn out to be this disastrous, then this
will lead to a flowering of new forks that eschew SystemD, and, further, it
will lead to the death of a bunch of Linux distributions.

It's bad, organizationally, for Debian, but a whole lot of the other
"flowers/forks" come and go with little real fanfare, so this isn't so
fundamental a change as may strike some...
-- 
When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the
question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle this?"