On Fri, 2017-12-08 at 12:17 +0100, deloptes wrote: > Michael Biebl wrote: > > > Basically, it was a completely inconsistent mess before systemd. > > Now you at least have a central place where you can configure your > > system behaviour. > > This is your opinion - if you can not understand the "mess" it is a > mess. > For most of us who dislike systemd your same statement is valid. I do > not > understand it and it is a mess. So we have 1:1 :) > Perhaps we like the old mess better than the new mess ;-) > > Please do not try to impose your opinion on others. Free software is > free > for this reason and we want to stay like this. We respect each others > opinion.
I think you are allowing your dislike of systemd to cloud the truth of Michael's statement. In the past, we had *no consistency*: inittab had one thing, display managers another, ACPI scripts another...if you wanted a specific policy, you had to change three or more separate systems. Along came [a new system] which provided a single place to define a consistent policy. Now, you may not like [a new system] for any number of reasons, related or unrelated to this example. You may not like the default policy that is now applied using [a new system], but that does not change the essential truth of the previous paragraph. -- Jonathan Dowland
