> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 10:33:47AM +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote: > > I think you miss the point which is those unit files depend on C code > > So do classic init scripts: > > $ file /sbin/init > /sbin/init: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), > dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.26, > BuildID[sha1]=0x313c383bcfc5369dd98468b31190be2e9b24df74, stripped > $ dpkg -S /sbin/init > sysvinit: /sbin/init > $ apt-cache show sysvinit | grep -i implemented > Tag: admin::boot, admin::configuring, implemented-in::c, >
Yes and do you know it was designed to do just what it does for a good reason in 32 kb of code. Hello world is 8kb > > that is not as easy to follow or as well documented as tools which > > follow the unix philosophy such as grep > > grep works just fine on C code, but it's a rather blunt instrument > and not the smartest way to work on C, that's true. Luckily the Debian > archive is brimming over with tried and tested tools for that purpose > (see e.g. ctags) > I am saying it is easy for anyone to follow edit and lookup a man page and even the c code of grep which isn't as complex as you make out and even reduce the c to what is needed if desired in an embedded grep and with a guarantee that any change can be made by users wherever they like for any task and cross platform, all of which are good things. What systemd offers is actually very little when you consider most of it simply utilises what Unix already offers and it does take away and divides not unites communities such as deep embedded from well very few distros and a tiny minority of the roll your own mobile world. > > and you also don't seem to have read between the lines about the detail of > > "more complex to debug". > > Michael doesn't need to read between any lines, I'm willing to bet he's one of > the most well informed people in this thread RE: systemd. He's actually run > systemd, works on the Debian package and triaged many of the bug reports. > Are you trying to say I haven't ran systemd? This is the kind of rubbish I was trying to avoid. > > In any case systemd has had more attention than it deserves so look > > inthis archive or likely any other archive (Gentoos a good one for > > a balanced view) and lwn.net for the arguments and make your own > > decision. Just don't believe the hype and understand that many pages on > > freedesktop.org aren't official or balanced but abused as if they are. > > What does 'official' mean? > If you look at freedesktop.org you will see it has official freedesktop.org hosted projects. Then there are things like systemd which has lots of completely incorrect information written by one guy. One of the latest to be flaunted around being his systemd myths which misses out all the important arguments and skirts around the ones he actually does try to address. I'm sure he has read LWN, so why he hasn't addressed the arguments or allowed comments I shall let you decide upon. -- _______________________________________________________________________ 'Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a universal interface' (Doug McIlroy) _______________________________________________________________________ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/78227.49579...@smtp149.mail.ird.yahoo.com
