On Sat, 30 Nov 2013 10:12:35 +0100 "Dmitrij D. Czarkoff" <czark...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Andreas Marschall wrote: > > > >Yes, very mature. The first statement I would agree on but in what way > >is Arch Linux with systemd a disaster? It runs very smoothely and fast > >over here. Or is it just the usual wannabe elitist bull...? > You know, the systemd (and friends) actually does a great job of ruining my > day with Arch boxes - by now I have one permanently hanging on boot, another > booting up twice as slowly as it did before the switch and a third one, which > gets misconfigured by the boot-time voodoo. Sure, at least some of these > problems are solvable, but I have to invest quite some time into it - and all > of it goes into compensating the "improvements" in boot process. And I still > can't see any benefit from the switch. > > -- > Dmitrij D. Czarkoff > The problem I see here is that the big GNU+Linux-distributors tend to add more and more abstractation layers on top of the base-system to automate it. A good example is the Gnome NetworkManager, which actually writes a ton of Mac Addresses into /etc/conf.d/net, making it impossible to hand-maintain these things afterwards. I could go on with PAM, ConsoleKit, Gnome KeyringManager and the like, but I'm sure you know (better) of the metastases of this cancerous disease so many man-hours were wasted for and which is the reason why we need multi-million dollar companies behind the big, automated distributions to fix software which breaks due to that, in the interest of providing a consistent "user experience". If you ever dare to dig deeper or if a problem surfaces, you're screwed. That's why I'm using Gentoo (On my Mac mini :P). Cheers FRIGN -- FRIGN <d...@frign.de>
