On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Myra Nelson <myra.nelson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I've followed this discussion closely and, as can be seen in one of > the posts below, I initially objected to it. I had previously tried > systemd with little success. Next I carefully re-read all the > objections, complaints, rants, raves, etc, and decided to try systemd > again. This isn't the place for personal info but I think it's > relevant here. I suffer from early onset dementia so it takes me more > time to understand documentation and retain information. Most of the > time I have to start over everytime I work on something because no > matter how many times I've done it, it doesn't stick. That's one > reason I prefer the rc.conf file and initscipts, it's easy to > understand and keep track off. > > I posted last night that it took me around 30 minutes reading and > editing to get my system booted properly. I was wrong. I still have a > couple of minor glitches, but nothing that breaks my system. I firmly > believe part of the problem is perception. Previously rc.conf held all > the information. On my system rc.conf is 716 B. The three files > (hostname 8 B, vconsole.conf 47 B, and locale.conf 30 B) take up less > space. Granted at the moment it's more but that will be offset when > the move to systemd can be completed. If I understand everything > correctly the conf.d and rc.d directorys will no longer be needed as > everything will be in /etc/systemd. The amount of disk space taken up > should, major caveat, be less because most of the files in > /etc/systemd/system/??? are soft links to the acutal files in > /usr/lib/systemd/system. > > Yes, apparently, this changes(?) some of Arch's KISS principle, but > maybe it doesn't. Maybe it actually makes it easier in the long run. > If you keep /etc backed up, you do don't you, it's a simple matter to > set everything up whenever where ever. > > I think the biggest problems here are "perception", resistance to > change - me, possibly some FUD, and no one likes being told what to > do. My main motivation for trying systemd again stemmed from realizing > I was using the same arguments I fought in another industry for years > "We've done it that way for 30 years and it works, why change now". > Don't think of it as change, think of it as "evolution". Everyone > believes in evolution, don't you? If this provides better integration > with upstream developers might that mean less breakage, patched > software, less complaints, and less bug reports to deal with for the > Arch Devs. I'm proof even old dogs can learn new tricks. > > I'm open to discussion on any points I made about assumptions of what > will and won't be necessary when the systemd integration is completed, > ie conf.d and rc.d etc. > > Links to previous discussions. > > > https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#label/archlinux%2Fgeneral/138ad0e074447461 > > https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#label/archlinux%2Fgeneral/138ab21f72d9bc2a > > https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#label/archlinux%2Fdev-public/138a6cee47d8ba96 > > Myra > > -- > Life's fun when your sick and psychotic! > Your links will only work for you, they are links to messages in your gmail inbox
