[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       opensuse
Subject:    Re: [opensuse] systemd
From:       Todd Rme <toddrme2178 () gmail ! com>
Date:       2017-07-16 1:50:09
Message-ID: CADb7s=tjtzwcXaZfg+PtfROQ=DO6jw9DWseSBT6PiXB=n72cMA () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 6:43 PM, Larry Stotler <larrystotler@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 4:44 PM, Anton Aylward
> <opensuse@antonaylward.com> wrote:
>> To claim that SysVInit is the One Way, the Right Way, The Way It has Always
>> Been, is incorrect to start with and exceedingly fatuous.
>
> My understanding is that most of the biggest complaints is that
> systemd doesn't do things the Unix way - do one thing and do it well.
> Like I said, I don't have a reason to not use it.


systemd is a project made up of lots of small, purpose-specific tools.
It follows "the Unix way" quite well.

Some people argue that this doesn't count because these different
tools are under a big umbrella project. The problem with that logic is
that if we apply that argument consistently, then then coreutils
wouldn't be "the Unix way", either. But systemd opponents don't
complain about it.

Other people argue that since the since these tools interact with each
other that systemd is "monolithic". The problem with that logic is
that systemd's components talk to each other through
publicly-available, documented interfaces. People can and have made
replacement components that talk to other parts of systemd using these
interfaces. That is the exact opposite of "monolithic". By that logic
GTK is monolithic, but systemd opponents don't complain about it
either.

On top of that, even if it were true that systemd doesn't follow "the
Unix way", well neither does the Linux kernel. But opponents of
systermd exclude it from that rule.

-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]