On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Ray Rashif <schiv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 22 January 2011 01:53, C Anthony Risinger <anthony@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> oh... my. there is too much <expletive deleted> to respond properly >> so i'll try touch a couple [several] things ... >> >> ... why the resistance at all? let me reiterate this niiiice and slow: >> >> SYSVINIT HAS NO POWER, NO FUNCTIONALITY, AND ABSOLUTELY ZERO >> USEFULNESS ON IT'S OWN. > > I just tried systemd. And it just failed. ok, so what went wrong? your sure you did everything correctly? more info would be needed to help you. > I don't want to know > anything else, and I don't want to find out why. ooooh now i see. maybe you meant to post here: http://ubuntuforums.org/ :-) ... because arch users are encouraged to help solve their own problems; whats your goal exactly? > Just looking at its > underlying framework without having to make it run successfully is > enough to get the point across - it is _not_ KISS. "KISS, #2 in the top ten list of misunderstood/abused/regurgitated concepts." let me get this straight, you tried once, it didn't work once, so now it's garbage? you must think the whole AUR is garbage too then? or what? > If it ever comes to > development attention to "adopt as default" or "replace sysvinit", I > will personally cast a negative vote. well luckily i don't think they run a democracy around here ;-) > With that said, I am all for dynamic systems. I may even use systemd > personally in the future. We use Arch Linux, so we can do what we want > with our systems. What the "default" is doesn't really matter. The > packages get my vote. indeed, and i'd mostly agree. however while im not a developer for archlinux, i wouldnt waste time on obsolete systems when a better alternative saves me time; you may end up maintaining the initscripts yourself. keep that in mind. the point of systemd is to make ALL of our lives easier, not more difficult. C Anthony
