> I pretty much stopped reading after the following line in the > composition: >====================================================== > Fourthly, I will only be dealing with systemd the service manager (of > which the init is an intracomponent subset, and also contains several > other internal subsystems and characteristics which will prove of > paramount importance to the analysis), and to a lesser extent journald. >====================================================== Same here, if systemd was just an init system, i d probably still avoid it and fight it, but the main problem is that its much more than that, eating everything around it ( http://neofutur.net/local/cache-vignettes/L200xH133/arton19-b28db.gif ), and that is the main problem, for sure.
>====================================================== > If systemd was just a PID1 with the features you enumerate above, I'd > be dancing in the street, not looking for a way out. >====================================================== not sure i d be dancing . . . but I mostly agree > If systemd had been just another init system, replacible by any other > init system, I probably would have thought nothing about it. The vast > majority of the problem is its complete fencing off of the underlying > OS. yup, and forcing his way in with hard dependencies and agressive communication. _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list [email protected] https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
