to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > Now watch all the old skoolers dashing out of their little caves and > waving their fists at something which could be read as a provocation > (I'm myself one of those, just look a bit upthread :) >
It is not about old or new, but about known and unknown. Unkown exposes me to risk. As also highlighted here the solution is not the best on multiuser environment, but I think one could configure systemd to respect the requirements. I first accepted systemd also advocated for "progress", but after a long discussion here (at least 6months ago) I revisited my opinion and installed sysvinit first on the server and then on the desktop, notebook etc. > In the sense of civilized discourse, I now do a bit of introspection > and think one could read Michael's statement differently. For those > using the computers "classically", there was no mess. Issue su at > any console (most of us did the migration to sudo a while ago, since > it's more convenient and a tad safer), done. No mess. > This is true and I think we'll find time to learn systemd and get comfortable with that. > But for a desktop environment, which has been silently permeated > by the assumption "one computer -- one user -- one display/keyboard" > and which wants to offer their users transparent access to system > management tasks (install printer, package system, video resolution, > yadda yadda) in a way that looks somewhat like Those Other Operating > Systems, the implementations we have seen are a mess, all this > Gnome *kit horror and whatever KDE does (there's enough mess still > left: why have Gnome and KDE to invent their own virtual file > systems? Have you ever had a look at what Gnome does to attach > emblems to files? And so on). > This is also true - gnome went insane and KDE unusable as of v4. > So I understand perfectly that those desktop environments have > clinged desperately to systemd. They are constantly on the brink > of breaking down under their own complexity, so exporting some > of it to Some Other Place always feels like a bit of fresh air. > > So in this context, I'd say Michael is spot on. > > Now if you don't buy into that desktop thing, systemd doesn't > look like a simplification or sorting out some mess, I'd think. > But some agree to differ on that too. For me personally systemd is very new and I need to find time to understand it and be able to manage it.
