On Fri, 11 Oct 2013 19:21:05 -0700, walt wrote: > On 10/11/2013 01:42 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote: > > > I don't like systemd, > > Sorry if my memory is failing (it surely is) but I don't recall any > explanation from you describing your dissatisfaction with systemd.
It was never germane to the conversation. I only mentioned it here to make it clear that I am not a systemd or Poettering apologist. I don't like the idea of such a complex and pervasive init process. Do one thing and do it well is the long-standing Unix mantra, and it's been long-standing for good reason. This is particularly applicable to the most critical process on the system, process 1. I'm also uncomfortable with the close ties between systemd and GNOME, not that have anything against the GNOME people but init should be independently controlled. Red Hat contribute more to the kernel than anyone else (12.5% IIRC) but they don't control its development. I have tried systemd on a minimal VM and it did boot very quickly, but that's not a real concern for me. The only system I reboot with any regularity is my laptop, and that boots equally quickly because it has an SSD. > With belated apologies to my many kind Brit friends from 1974, I ask you > to tell us WTF you dislike systemd, and use language that us Yanks can > fscking unnerstand, got it, punk? OMG IT'S NOT AWESOME! -- Neil Bothwick New sig wanted good price paid.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
