Would we have DNSCurve without DNSSEC, will DNSSEC actually ever get
fixed having got it out sooner to do so or would it have died and not
been replaced. Would we have DNSSEC with ECC already, solving a large
chunk of the issues. Perhaps pertinent questions for Linux init?
Yes!, why
Hi All
What an interesting diatribe of views and opinions it's been with clearly many
individuals letting their guard down ever so slightly. initially I was of the
opinion that the original subject line of this thread was incorrect and should
have been Petition to not implement SystemD.
My friends at Red Hat inform me there is little marked improvement with
SystemD however It would be jolly nice if we was all the same. so I'm
slightly mystified at the vehement determination to adopt it?
It would be very nice but in fact whilst unifying some it's current over
spec'd design
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 8:14 PM, Kevin Chadwick ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Would we have DNSCurve without DNSSEC, will DNSSEC actually ever get
fixed having got it out sooner to do so or would it have died and not
been replaced. Would we have DNSSEC with ECC already, solving a large
chunk of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/27/2012 05:40 AM, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
you sir, are an arrant sack of shite -- a pitifully miserable sore
spewing an egregious pus of arrogance and obstinance -- a first-class
jerk-off!
Wow, Stephen Fry would be proud.
Suppose for some reason the majority of scientists believe in the
theory of the Big Bang. And then I come along and wonder... where is
the evidence? Well, if the Big Bang theory has merits, there would be
tons of evidence, and any decent scientist that believes in this
theory would gladly
Every piece of complex software has bugs; those bugs
won't be found if the software isn't tested, and since you're not willing
to participate in that process you've no right to harass those who have.
Not everyone wants complex software, just about any other init
system let's you decide that.
The cumulated amount of time spent on these endless discussions has
now almost certainly get past the amount of time necessary to fix
initscripts.
Fix them instead of feeding trolls.
Except there will be more fallout from systemd's wide adoption than our
own selfish needs but as that is
On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 11:06:12 +0100
Kevin Chadwick ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
In fact in most cases that was exactly what happened with some
scientists and teachers saying the Big Bang was all but proven until
fairly recently the number questioning and the evidence built up
against it. To me
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 5:06 AM, Kevin Chadwick ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.ukwrote:
Suppose for some reason the majority of scientists believe in the
theory of the Big Bang. And then I come along and wonder... where is
the evidence? Well, if the Big Bang theory has merits, there would be
tons of
Of course the Big Bang theory is morphing with one option being many
Big Bang's and that it was a point in history and not the beginning
which is perfectly plausible and systemd may morph sufficiently for
more users too, in time. I care little though (except any consequences)
and don't
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 07:15:26PM +0530, gt wrote:
Maybe you can test the AUR package and see if works as good as your own
setup, and maybe you can contribute to that package if you ever find the
time to do so.
What I'd offer to the AUR is run scripts for common services like
apache, sshd,
The cumulated amount of time spent on these endless discussions has
now almost certainly get past the amount of time necessary to fix
initscripts.
Fix them instead of feeding trolls.
Rémy.
On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 03:34:00PM +0200, R??my Oudompheng wrote:
The cumulated amount of time spent on these endless discussions has
now almost certainly get past the amount of time necessary to fix
initscripts.
init scripts are irredeemable. The argument is more one of whether
systemd is to
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Felipe Contreras
felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 6:30 PM, Bigby James anokn...@gmail.com wrote:
Having watched this thread (and the Beware thread) for some time, I can
say without equivocation that Felipe is not trying to reason
On 08/26/12 at 07:55pm, Bigby James wrote:
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Felipe Contreras
felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 6:30 PM, Bigby James anokn...@gmail.com wrote:
Having watched this thread (and the Beware thread) for some time, I can
say without
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Felipe Contreras
felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
A bum on the street might not be a reliable source of information, but
he/she might still be saying the truth. Cops wouldn't take their word
at face value (or almost anyone for that matter), but if a
2012/8/27 C Anthony Risinger anth...@xtfx.me:
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Felipe Contreras
felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
A bum on the street might not be a reliable source of information, but
he/she might still be saying the truth. Cops wouldn't take their word
at face value
From: rafael ff1 rafael.f...@gmail.com
To: General Discussion about Arch Linux arch-general@archlinux.org
Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2012 11:49 PM
Subject: Re: [arch-general] SystemD poll
2012/8/27 C Anthony Risinger anth...@xtfx.me:
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012
On 08/26/12 at 10:17pm, Chris Evans wrote:
From: rafael ff1 rafael.f...@gmail.com
To: General Discussion about Arch Linux arch-general@archlinux.org
Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2012 11:49 PM
Subject: Re: [arch-general] SystemD poll
2012/8/27 C
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 10:25 PM, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia
archli...@ishpeck.net wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 11:34:28AM -0400, Brandon Watkins wrote:
Can we then agree then that you don't *know* if systemd is stable
enough to be used (in general, not only by you)?
Felipe
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 11:24:31PM -0500, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
... are we done? you guys are really boring me to death here --
interest level is pitifully low. yawn.
Pretty long message for someone who's uninterested.
if you want to see a boot up process that uses daemontools, or runit,
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia
archli...@ishpeck.net wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 10:03:44PM -0300, Denis A. Alto?? Falqueto wrote:
You know that all this jibber-jabber could be easily avoided if you
just asked for help or opened bug reports, don't you?
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 05:56:32AM -0600, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote:
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 11:24:31PM -0500, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
so buck up, do something useful, or find
another outlet ... puh-puh-please?
I'm not sure exactly what you're asking for here.
When I have
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 6:30 PM, Bigby James anokn...@gmail.com wrote:
Having watched this thread (and the Beware thread) for some time, I can
say without equivocation that Felipe is not trying to reason with
anyone. He clearly doesn't understand the concepts he himself refers to
(rules of
On Thursday 23 Aug 2012 21:47:14 Norbert Zeh wrote:
I tried to keep my mouth shut but can't resist to reply here because I
simply don't understand how you think the world works. Do you want to see
proof that every piece of open-source software is ready to be used? That's
ridiculous.
I tried to keep my mouth shut but can't resist to reply here because I
simply don't understand how you think the world works. Do you want to see
proof that every piece of open-source software is ready to be used? That's
ridiculous. Open-source software is being developed. People think
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Paul Gideon Dann pdgid...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday 23 Aug 2012 21:47:14 Norbert Zeh wrote:
I tried to keep my mouth shut but can't resist to reply here because I
simply don't understand how you think the world works. Do you want to see
proof that every
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Kevin Chadwick ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Not really, the Justice system fails perhaps more than it works. All of
these responses are actually just diluting and ignoring the points he
has raised and responding to responses of an inflammatory kind. The 14%
Despite that, no serious (IMHO) bugs or architectural issues have been
found (there has of course been plenty of irrelevant complaints, but
those I ignore).
http://osvdb.org/search?search%5Bvuln_title%5D=systemdsearch%5Btext_type%5D=alltext
Two local root exploits this year. So if your
On Aug 24, 2012 3:09 PM, Kevin Chadwick ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
http://osvdb.org/search?search%5Bvuln_title%5D=systemdsearch%5Btext_type%5D=alltext
Two local root exploits this year. So if your browser has a bug, systemd
would have allowed priveledge escalation
Notice that these bugs
http://osvdb.org/search?search%5Bvuln_title%5D=systemdsearch%5Btext_type%5D=alltext
Two local root exploits this year. So if your browser has a bug, systemd
would have allowed priveledge escalation
Notice that these bugs were in logind (the console kit replacement) and not
in the
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 2:47 AM, Norbert Zeh n...@cs.dal.ca wrote:
Felipe Contreras [2012.08.23 2214 +0200]:
Notice that I said probably. Again, I don't *need* to provide any
evidence because I'm not making the claim that systemd has problems,
or that it's not ready, I am simply asking for
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:39 PM, Stephen E. Baker
baker.stephe...@gmail.com wrote:
On 23/08/2012 4:14 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote:
[snip]
Is systemd ready? Where is the evidence?
https://www.archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics shows that about 14% of
arch users who are using pkgstat have
Q: Is systemd ready? A: We don't know.
It's more ready than sysvinit or the fragile shell scripts which lack
basic features.
--
дамјан
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 04:48:01PM -0700, Patrick Murphy wrote:
Could you give me a brief explanation as to why init scripts are better?
They really aren't. The best argument one can make in their favor
is that they're already debugged and stable. systemd, as a new
thing, will inevitably go
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 10:03:44PM -0300, Denis A. Alto?? Falqueto wrote:
You know that all this jibber-jabber could be easily avoided if you
just asked for help or opened bug reports, don't you? You know, just
like when polite peopple try to solve their own problems and, when
nothing else
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 11:34:28AM -0400, Brandon Watkins wrote:
Can we then agree then that you don't *know* if systemd is stable
enough to be used (in general, not only by you)?
Felipe Contreras
Umm, the fact thats its been the default init system in several popular
distros already?
2012/8/25 Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:39 PM, Stephen E. Baker
baker.stephe...@gmail.com wrote:
On 23/08/2012 4:14 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote:
[snip]
Is systemd ready? Where is the evidence?
https://www.archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics shows
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Felipe Contreras
felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
No, I never said anything like that. All I said is [...]
[...]
[...]
[...]
[...]
[...] [...] [...]
*yaaawn* ...
... are we done? you guys are really boring me to death here --
interest level is pitifully
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 11:02 PM, Andrew Hills hills...@gmail.com wrote:
Felipe--if I may address you by your first name--in case you're
confused about why no one will listen to your arguments, let me
try to explain; it may reduce your frustration. You made the
following two statements without
On 23/08/2012 4:14 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote:
[snip]
Is systemd ready? Where is the evidence?
https://www.archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics shows that about 14% of
arch users who are using pkgstat have systemd installed. It is not
default and not depended on by anything, so that means a
2012/8/23 Stephen E. Baker baker.stephe...@gmail.com:
On 23/08/2012 4:14 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote:
[snip]
Is systemd ready? Where is the evidence?
https://www.archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics shows that about 14% of
arch users who are using pkgstat have systemd installed. It is not
Felipe Contreras [2012.08.23 2214 +0200]:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 11:02 PM, Andrew Hills hills...@gmail.com wrote:
Felipe--if I may address you by your first name--in case you're
confused about why no one will listen to your arguments, let me
try to explain; it may reduce your frustration.
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto
denisfalqu...@gmail.com wrote:
You know that all this jibber-jabber could be easily avoided if you
just asked for help or opened bug reports, don't you?
As I said multiple times, and even directly to you: I did, and even
Lennart was
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase s...@lutzhaase.com wrote:
On 22.08.2012 02:48, Felipe Contreras wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase s...@lutzhaase.com
wrote:
On 22.08.2012 02:10, Felipe Contreras wrote:
Switching to systemd is not a small change,
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:40 AM, Felipe Contreras
felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase s...@lutzhaase.com
wrote:
On 22.08.2012 02:48, Felipe Contreras wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase s...@lutzhaase.com
wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Brandon Watkins bwa...@gmail.com wrote:
Umm, the fact thats its been the default init system in several popular
distros already? Fedora 15+ ,
In Fedora they didn't just went from sysv style scripts to full blown
systemd with all their features. They did it
2012/8/22 Brandon Watkins bwa...@gmail.com:
[Felipe Contreras FUD]
Umm, the fact thats its been the default init system in several popular
distros already? Fedora 15+ , Opensuse 12.1 , Mageia 2, Mandriva 2011... I
don't know why you keep hanging onto this idea that systemd is untested
or
Felipe--if I may address you by your first name--in case you're
confused about why no one will listen to your arguments, let me
try to explain; it may reduce your frustration. You made the
following two statements without any evidence or even any
suggestion that you care about evidence:
But
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Ionut Biru ib...@archlinux.org wrote:
with or without this poll, we are continuing with our plan.
That's exactly what you should do, if your objective is to loose
users; ignore them.
Cheers.
--
Felipe Contreras
What alternative to systemd would you rather see? It makes things much
easier for the developers and if you don't like it you can fork arch into
your own disro. Besides relocating a changing some config files, systemd is
not going to have a noticeable impact on more than a few users. It offers
On 22 Aug 2012 07:22, Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Ionut Biru ib...@archlinux.org wrote:
with or without this poll, we are continuing with our plan.
That's exactly what you should do, if your objective is to loose
users; ignore them.
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:25 AM, Patrick Murphy theger...@gmail.com wrote:
What alternative to systemd would you rather see?
systemd is the alternative, the standard has been initscripts for
decades. Now that distributions are switching to systemd they are
starting to see boot problems that
On 22 August 2012 01:40, Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:25 AM, Patrick Murphy theger...@gmail.com wrote:
What alternative to systemd would you rather see?
systemd is the alternative, the standard has been initscripts for
decades. Now that
Could you give me a brief explanation as to why init scripts are better?
I'm newish to Unix style operating systems
On Aug 21, 2012 4:40 PM, Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:25 AM, Patrick Murphy theger...@gmail.com
wrote:
What alternative to
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:44 AM, Alexandre Ferrando alfer...@gmail.com wrote:
And sysvinit didn't have those when it began? Come on.
I don't know, I probably wasn't born yet, and probably there weren't
even computers before. But supposing there was something before, I'm
sure the people that
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Patrick Murphy theger...@gmail.com wrote:
Could you give me a brief explanation as to why init scripts are better?
I'm newish to Unix style operating systems
As I said; they are tried-and-true since *decades*, all the problems
have been ironed out by slow small
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Felipe Contreras
felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Patrick Murphy theger...@gmail.com wrote:
Could you give me a brief explanation as to why init scripts are better?
I'm newish to Unix style operating systems
As I said; they
On 22.08.2012 02:10, Felipe Contreras wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Patrick Murphy theger...@gmail.com wrote:
Could you give me a brief explanation as to why init scripts are better?
I'm newish to Unix style operating systems
As I said; they are tried-and-true since *decades*, all
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:28 AM, Oon-Ee Ng ngoonee.t...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Felipe Contreras
felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Patrick Murphy theger...@gmail.com wrote:
Could you give me a brief explanation as to why init scripts
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Felipe Contreras
felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Patrick Murphy theger...@gmail.com wrote:
Could you give me a brief explanation as to why init scripts are better?
I'm newish to Unix style operating systems
As I said; they
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase s...@lutzhaase.com wrote:
On 22.08.2012 02:10, Felipe Contreras wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Patrick Murphy theger...@gmail.com
wrote:
Could you give me a brief explanation as to why init scripts are better?
I'm newish to Unix
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Felipe Contreras
felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
So if it works for you, it will surely work for *everybody* else. I
have seen this argument so many times that I'm starting to worry about
the rationality of Arch Linux users and developers.
Yes, it's good to
On 22/08/12 03:03, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Felipe Contreras
felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
So if it works for you, it will surely work for *everybody* else. I
have seen this argument so many times that I'm starting to worry about
the rationality of
On 22.08.2012 02:48, Felipe Contreras wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase s...@lutzhaase.com wrote:
On 22.08.2012 02:10, Felipe Contreras wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Patrick Murphy theger...@gmail.com
wrote:
Could you give me a brief explanation as to why
On 22/08/12 at 04:23am, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
On 22.08.2012 02:48, Felipe Contreras wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase s...@lutzhaase.com
wrote:
On 22.08.2012 02:10, Felipe Contreras wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Patrick Murphy theger...@gmail.com
On 08/22/12 at 02:06am, Felipe Contreras wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:44 AM, Alexandre Ferrando alfer...@gmail.com
wrote:
And sysvinit didn't have those when it began? Come on.
I don't know, I probably wasn't born yet, and probably there weren't
even computers before. But supposing
I think a poll is a good idea.
Remember it's not about whether or not you're allowed to use
initscripts/systemd, it's about what will become the default.
Sure, in the end it's the devs who get the final call, they're putting
in the work after all, but a poll can show whether the community
agrees
I agree with you. Using systemd to be the default or not is a very
disputable issue. Many people like me do not like it, but some people think
that it is the trend and so accept it. A poll is the best way to solve this
problem.
2012/8/19 Roel Deckers r.deckers...@gmail.com
I think a poll is a
A poll is the best way to solve this
problem.
A poll would be better done by the mailing list but I can't see anyone
counting and verifying (even then newly seen addresses can't be
verified) and many people don't really care as long as they're system
works the way they want which is why Windows
Quoted from [1]:
The hardest thing about voting is determining when to do it. In
general, taking a vote should be very rare—a last resort for when all
other options have failed. Don't think of voting as a great way to
resolve debates. It isn't. It ends discussion, and thereby ends creative
On Sunday 19 Aug 2012 19:11:12 you wrote:
I think the debate of default is useless.
I meant the voting not debate. That was typo.
--
Cheers and Regards
Jayesh Badwaik
stop html mail | always bottom-post
www.asciiribbon.org | www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
On Sunday 19 Aug 2012 13:23:12 Roel Deckers wrote:
I think a poll is a good idea.
Remember it's not about whether or not you're allowed to use
initscripts/systemd, it's about what will become the default.
Sure, in the end it's the devs who get the final call, they're putting
in the work after
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 01:23:12PM +0200, Roel Deckers wrote:
Remember it's not about whether or not you're allowed to use
initscripts/systemd, it's about what will become the default.
No, maintaining both boot methods, even if upstream weren't
abandoning init scripts (which they are going to)
A package for an MTA (for example) will have to know how to start
itself up. You're left with the following options:
1. Rework the MTA to startup with your own method
2. Have the package maintainer somehow allow both such as...
3. Post to the AUR (or whatever) another version of the same
2012/8/19 Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia archli...@ishpeck.net
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 01:23:12PM +0200, Roel Deckers wrote:
Remember it's not about whether or not you're allowed to use
initscripts/systemd, it's about what will become the default.
No, maintaining both boot methods, even if
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 05:28:16PM +0200, Damjan wrote:
A package for an MTA (for example) will have to know how to start
itself up. You're left with the following options:
1. Rework the MTA to startup with your own method
2. Have the package maintainer somehow allow both such as...
3.
On Aug 19, 2012 10:35 AM, Alessio 'Blaster' Biancalana
dottorblas...@archlinux.us wrote:
2012/8/19 Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia archli...@ishpeck.net
No, maintaining both boot methods, even if upstream weren't
abandoning init scripts (which they are going to) would be
a terrible waste
A package for an MTA (for example) will have to know how to start
itself up. You're left with the following options:
1. Rework the MTA to startup with your own method
2. Have the package maintainer somehow allow both such as...
3. Post to the AUR (or whatever) another version of the same
Remember it's not about whether or not you're allowed to use
initscripts/systemd, it's about what will become the default.
No, maintaining both boot methods, even if upstream weren't
abandoning init scripts (which they are going to) would be
a terrible waste of time.
What upstream are you
2012/8/19 C Anthony Risinger anth...@xtfx.me
IMO its very refreshing to finally see these deficiencies being tackled.
Linux landscape had been thirsty for years about these decisions. I like
very much the Arch approach to this matter and, as I said, I like systemd
as my init system.
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 07:14:29PM +0200, Damjan wrote:
I don't understand why you think parsing is a hard thing. INI files have
been around for millennia (in internet years) and both parsers and
writers for them are well established in many languages.
The question is not whether it is hard
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 01:05:27PM -0500, David C. Rankin wrote:
In all of the discussion about systemd, all anyone should care about is:
(1) Does systemd provide *needed* additional capabilities that are not
currently available;
(2) What are they?
(3) What are the disadvantages
On Sat, 18 Aug 2012 20:11:58 +1000
John Briggs johne...@optusnet.com.au wrote:
snipped wisdom
As I have said in a previous post, I arrived in linux a little later than you,
but for much the same reasons. On KISS / The Arch Way / Unix philosophy
etc, it seems to me that here as in my own field
On 2012/8/18 John Briggs johne...@optusnet.com.au wrote:
IMHO systemd is unnecessarily complex in trying to do too many separate
tasks.
I don't understand why you are saying that. The systemd project may be
larger than a small utility, but it is composed of:
* multiple, small utilities that do
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 08:11:58PM +1000, John Briggs wrote:
IMHO the cost of Linux embracing complexity is a loss of freedom. We must
all decide personally if we are willing to pay this price or we remain true
to the principles of GNU/Linux and abandon this type of software.
At this time we
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 12:03:55PM +0100, Geoff wrote:
As I have said in a previous post, I arrived in linux a little later than you,
but for much the same reasons. On KISS / The Arch Way / Unix philosophy
etc, it seems to me that here as in my own field (law), maxims make good
servants but
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 01:52:59PM +0200, R??my Oudompheng wrote:
I don't understand why you are saying that.
I can't speak for him but I can tell you why I say it.
Parsing a config file is _always_ unnecessary complexity. It
is where some of the biggest bugs lurk. It hurts the
functional
On Thursday 16 Aug 2012 20:54:21 Ionut Biru wrote:
with or without this poll, we are continuing with our plan.
+1
--
Cheers and Regards
Jayesh Badwaik
stop html mail | always bottom-post
www.asciiribbon.org | www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Jérôme Bartand moije...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi!
Yesterday I read on Phoronix that Arch devs are planning to switch to
SystemD, but many users are unhappy with this move.
It's systemd -- not SystemD. Learn more about it, please:
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Jérôme Bartand moije...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi!
Yesterday I read on Phoronix that Arch devs are planning to switch to
SystemD, but many users are unhappy with this move. You can see a lot of
controversy discussion on this list. I have created an online poll to
Am Fri, 17 Aug 2012 10:20:47 +0100
schrieb mike cloaked mike.cloa...@gmail.com:
Isn't it interesting that the vote is currently 81% support for arch
to switch to systemd (even with the misspelling in the poll), and only
19% against! Looks like at least from the perspective of this poll
(even
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Heiko Baums li...@baums-on-web.de wrote:
Am Fri, 17 Aug 2012 10:20:47 +0100
schrieb mike cloaked mike.cloa...@gmail.com:
Isn't it interesting that the vote is currently 81% support for arch
to switch to systemd (even with the misspelling in the poll), and
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 11:09 AM, mike cloaked mike.cloa...@gmail.com wrote:
True but see my posting in another thread in this mailing list today
pointing to some rather more useful stats.
Actually better than a poll are the comments that appear in:
Hi!
Yesterday I read on Phoronix that Arch devs are planning to switch to
SystemD, but many users are unhappy with this move. You can see a lot of
controversy discussion on this list. I have created an online poll to
determine the will of the community:
On 08/16/12 18:59, Jérôme Bartand wrote:
Hi!
Yesterday I read on Phoronix that Arch devs are planning to switch to
SystemD, but many users are unhappy with this move. You can see a lot of
controversy discussion on this list. I have created an online poll to
determine the will of the
On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 18:59:24 +0200
Jérôme Bartand moije...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi!
Yesterday I read on Phoronix that Arch devs are planning to switch to
SystemD, but many users are unhappy with this move. You can see a lot
of controversy discussion on this list. I have created an online poll
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Øyvind Heggstad
mrelen...@har-ikkje.netwrote:
On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 18:59:24 +0200
Jérôme Bartand moije...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi!
Yesterday I read on Phoronix that Arch devs are planning to switch to
SystemD, but many users are unhappy with this move. You
It's actually more like a business. Often times businesses do polls or
statistical information gathering in order to better server their
customers.
yeah, but an open online poll is not statistics gathering, because you
don't have any way to ensure that you get a representative random
1 - 100 of 112 matches
Mail list logo
