On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Jelle van der Waa <jelle@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 08/09/12 22:00, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia wrote: > > I think what he was saying wasn't that systemd is hard but switching is > hard irrespectively of what you're switching to. > Because the devs made systemd being able to use rc.conf? > > It takes less then a day to use systemd, but I am not forcing you to use > it. > > -- > Jelle van der Waa > > Yeah, I found systemd very easy to learn. The wiki page is great, and after switching to it I prefer it because I just find it a lot easier to deal with than sysvinit IMO. For example I find systemd's .service files so much cleaner and easier to understand than initscripts, they are also portable and can be included in upstream packages. This "Oh my god systemd is hard and I'm being forced to use it!" FUD I keep seeing is getting pretty ridiculous... Even if arch does someday switch to systemd, I'm sure initscripts will be supported for quite some time, giving plenty of time to learn/transition (again really not that hard) in the event that that ever happened. Arch has always been a bleeding edge constantly changing distro, if you want everything to stay the same forever, use debian. No matter what happens with this whole sysvinit vs systemd kerfuffle, you will never be "forced" to use systemd in arch, just like you've never been forced to use sysvinit...
