On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Philipp Kern <[email protected]> wrote: ... > it's much easier to write snippets for than sysvinit. It does proper > supervision that restarts services when they go down. So where's the problem?
It may simply be learning curve. But that is a real effect, so some push-back should be expected and planned for. (I like to create game changes as much as anyone, so not saying I'm personally any better than Poettering and Sievers on the disruption front.) > I know it's a heated topic, but still I hate to see unsourced comments > such as this. Having been slapped down for whining about it (by friends who *like* the new MO), I gave it more thought. The objection is over a certain loss of simplicity. (There are other features creeping into Linux where loss of simplicity is observed.) Frankly, 'systemd' is overkill on some points. For one thing, startup is not a desired state on systems where systemd improves startup. Another is restart: as a community had been getting more compliance on consistent PID file use. But with 'systemd' I can no longer reliably cat the PID file to kill the daemon. I should stop here lest this group also accuse me of whining. The fact that it breaks previous compatibility with Solaris and AIX is *not* a plus. I know David and his team do a lot of work with those systems. -- -- R; <>< ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
