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?"
