> Are there still human beings believing that "progress" is a function
> of chronology: the newer, the better?
I think there are many who believe that everything they find stressful
in the present will be taken care of in the next technological
iteration.
Lucio.
you know where to get it, etc...
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 10:02:46AM +0200, dante wrote:
>
>[...]
> I also have the impression that the trend set by the original Unix
> architecture (small, one-job components, generic interfaces)
> is nowadays replaced in many areas with integrated solutions
> ("frameworks") that provide non-se
This is a valid observation, although as everything that has to do with
architecture, hard to prove.
(Don't use the P-word, that's reserved for Plato and Nietzsche.)
I also have the impression that the trend set by the original Unix
architecture (small, one-job components, generic interfaces)
i
> http://lkml.iu.edu//hypermail/linux/kernel/1408.1/02496.html
just when you think a given operating systems would
not be bastardized any further, some genius fucks it
to the next level.
launchd/smf and a webserver as process 1...
baffling, this is.
That's mainly interpersonal politics. Poettering probably pounded him
too hard one time.
He isn't giving a technical refutation of systemd and that's actually
very well possible.
Why shouldn't someone turn the ranter to LFS instead? Someone with 20
years of so-called loyalty and evangelism o
http://lkml.iu.edu//hypermail/linux/kernel/1408.1/02496.html
Someone should turn this guy on to Plan 9. :-)
Arnold
