Re: complaints about systemd

On 10/20/2014 05:28 PM, Christopher Browne wrote:
>
>
> While I wasn't keen on Upstart getting chosen, I think the page they 
> prepared
> describing the merits of moving from SysVInit presents good points well.
>
Sure, there is always merit to both sides of an argument.  In the 
process of fighting
about things, we gradually resort to deeper and sillier caricatures of 
the 'other side'
and before ya know it, things get stupid.
>
> Unfortunately, the current goings-on seem to risk being free of 
> technical content,
> and fodder for flame warring.
>
And that's what should be resisted at all costs.  It must be about merit.


> I guess I find myself displeased with certain technical points (e.g. - 
> claims of 1s boot time, that seem invalidated), but I'm usually finding
> things working on my systems that have SystemD.  So far, I can't 
> establish, from
> my own observations, that "different" == "bad".
>
Experienced people tend to have a natural gut level distrust of anything 
new-fangled, often
not without reason.  Still, almost everyone agrees that the old sysV 
needed a brush up,
so what's next? Surely the best possible thing would be to address the 
problems with 'D'
without abandoning it altogether? The alternative systems don't seem to 
have any huge
enthusiasm behind them.  Anyway, I sure hope it  doesn't come down to a 
schism.