On 21/10/14 15:10, Miles Fidelman wrote: > Scott Ferguson wrote: >> Good question Patrick - top posted as I'm referring to the Subject. >> >> On 21/10/14 06:45, Patrick Bartek wrote: >>> After much vitriolic gnashing of teeth from those opposed to systemd, >>> I wonder... What is a better alternative? And it can't be sysvinit. >>> >>> Yes. Syvinit still works, but it is after all 20 years old. It's been >>> patched and bolted onto and jury-rigged to get it to do things that >>> weren't even around (or dreamt of) at its inception. It's long past >>> due for a contemporary replacement. Whatever that may be. >>> >>> So, what would you all propose? For a server? Or for a user desktop? >>> Or something that fulfills both scenarios? And why? >> >> One of the difficulties is that there is no clear distinction between a >> desktop and a server - just degrees. >> > > Um, yes, there is. Typically different hardware (headless for > starters), storage area networks, clusters, high availability, as well > as different role, and so forth. > > Miles >
With respect, you're just repeating your claim that there is a clear distinction between server and desktop - not proving it, which doesn't advance the discussion. Samba is a server, as is NFS, and apache. If you run them on a desktop is it still *just* a desktop? Can you not run a desktop on server hardware? Can you not run a server on desktop hardware? I don't "believe" you've thought this through... :) I'll leave pulseaudio out, just to make things simpler (and acknowledge that "simple" is a synonym for "dumb"). Kind regards P.S. I have been told that one major distro does (or is attempting to do) just that - separate into a 'server' and a 'desktop' distribution. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/544710aa.4080...@gmail.com
