On 23/07/12 13:10, fredbezies wrote: > 2012/7/23 Rodrigo Rivas <rodrigorivascosta@xxxxxxxxx>: >> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 12:35 PM, 1126 >> <mailinglists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote: >> >>> For you this change might be a reason to switch to Fedora, you say. I >>> mean, seriously? How is it all handled in Fedora then? Well, I don't >>> now, actually. >>> >> >> Fedora is RedHat, and that's where systemd came to live, so you can guess... >> > > I wrote the first message before I successfully done a setup with a > minimal rc.conf > >> >>> - It's a rolling release distro: You only have to carefully do pacman >> ./> -Syu to keep your system up-to-date. I started using Linux with Ubuntu >>> and first I really looked forward to a new release, I mean new >>> features, new artwork and all that stuff. But distupgrade nearly >>> always failed and so I re-installed my system every six months. This >>> is not good! With ArchLinux I can spent way more time just using my >>> system instead of playing admin. >>> >> >> Well said. I came from Ubuntu also, and I expected that in Arch some things >> would break because of it being rolling and more bleeding-edge than Ubuntu. > > For the record, I'm using arch since end of 2008 / beginning of 2009. > > It is the first time I was very upset by a change from developer team. > >> I accepted that, but as it happened, it breaks _less_ than Ubuntu. >> >> And, actually, about the rc.conf split, I couldn't care less. One file, >> three files, doesn't make a difference to me. As long as they are text >> files, and not binary ones, like some other mainstream systems, all is good. >> > > Not 3, but 6 more files. I do agree you don't have to modify them > everyday, but it is - in a way - harder to set u than a single one. If it's documented it's hard? Sure one file would be easier, but if the 3,4,5 or 6 files are documented there should be no real problems. > > >> Just my 0.02 € >> -- >> Regards. > > > -- Jelle van der Waa
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
