> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 23:50:45 -0800
> From: Nathan Coulson <conat...@gmail.com>
> To: LFS Developers Mailinglist <lfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org>
> Subject: Re: [lfs-dev] sysvinit programs
>
.
.
>
> A thought I was having about systemd vs sysvinit. If the books are
> being developed in parallel, we should probably try to use the same
> programs in each. ex:/ if we use pidof in procps-ng we should also
> use the pidof from procps in systemd. (The above is using the pidof
> from procps, but seemed like a good example to use).
>
- and so the (again, entirely predictable) crowbar-ing begins ...
Systemd folks are not interested in bidirectional influence: it's their
way or the highway (as they see it, anyhow; it's a bit risible). _When_
(not 'if') sysd folks make yet another deliberate contrived change such
that 'the sysd way' now uses program 'y' and deprecates - and deliberately
"now cannot use" - the related and formerly-used program 'x'; while
program 'x' and not 'y' has been in use in b/lfs; then you're saying that
b/lfs should switch over to program 'y'.
Are you seriously suggesting that b/lfs lets itself be led and pushed
around by the nose, by sysd folks, like that? Nice try, but you won't
fool everyone: not everyone will follow you into the darkness.
rgds,
akhiezer
> --
> Nathan Coulson (conathan)
> ------
> Location: British Columbia, Canada
> Timezone: PST (-8)
> Webpage: http://www.nathancoulson.com
> --
>
--
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
