On Mon, 26 Jun 2017 21:30:39 -0700 Bruce Perens <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Hendrik Boom <[email protected]> > wrote: > > The point is that that proposed libsystemd0 would *not* be an init > > system, and it would still enable software that was written to use > > systemd to run flawlessly. > > > > But I have to agree that writing such a thing is infeasible because > > the so-called systemd cabal can change the specs faster than anyone > > can do the reverse engineering. And it will take reverse > > engineering, because the specs aren't sufficient. > > > > I use the term "strategic incompetence" for the organisations that > > produce such system(d)s. > I really dare any "cabal" to change both the specs and the *clients > *in a way I can't keep up with. There are enough clients. > > No real programmer would worry about something like this. > > This is getting silly. So true, but I'm a fake programmer, having spent almost two decades making my living writing office automation code in C, Perl, Turbo Pascal, Clarion, Rbase, and probably 10 other languages. As a fake programmer I just can't keep up with the moving target obfuscation of the "cabal", who, did I mention, consists of several people paid good salaries just to keep the obfuscation moving. I know if I were a real programmer I'd be able to keep up with 10 people who have been dealing with their code base for 6 years and are paid just to move their obfuscation, and still have plenty of time for my life and my day job. But alas, I'm just a fake programmer. SteveT Steve Litt June 2017 featured book: The Key to Everyday Excellence http://www.troubleshooters.com/key _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list [email protected] https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
