On 26 Mar 2014 12:30, Matthias Urlichs <matth...@urlichs.de> wrote: [...] > > But here is the vastly oversimplified technical argument... > > > To the point of being neither technical nor valid. > (Which admittedly was never in doubt even before I started reading.)
What do you consider technical? Vastly oversimplified doesn't mean automatically wrong in this context. It means there are a huge amount more of valid technical points I can raise here, but under the requirements expressed, I had to fit it down to a page, and so I left out quite a lot. These arguments are still valid, even if they are but only a small tip of the iceberg. > > I think you will confirm that neither you, nor I, nor the guy who came > > up with the original idea actually understands how it works > > If understanding how systemd works is so much of a problem for you that you > cannot even conceive of anybody, let alone its author, doing so then I'd > like to suggest that debian-devel is not the right place for you. One of the problems of giving truncated information is that some people aren't aware of the steps one has already taken to establish the validity of the argument. Lennart Poettering doesn't really understand what systemd is, and as a consequence, how it works. I tested this out myself. You can read up on how I determined this if you want, but it is a truth in its own right. > I'd suggest an alternate mailing list, but I'm afraid I'd offent both you > and the other participants of that list, should I do so. You do not have to fear that you will offend me. But, there are specific reasons why debian-devel is the primary target here. Again... information I left out in the condensed version. -Kev -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CADkoAxj+rFQXvGhv-BHF5pX0DZwMV=gyioaf_d8j8be-ywz...@mail.gmail.com
