2012/8/15 Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx>: > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Tom Gundersen <teg@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Felipe Contreras >> <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> I don't have that machine available at the moment, but I don't see how >>> such an issue could have been fixed given the lack of interest from >>> Lennart in that G+ post. >> >> Without the insults, this would have been picked up on and sorted out >> a long time ago. At least based on my experience. > > That's a loss for systemd, not for me. And I didn't insult anybody, > Lennart did, so it's not my fault. > >>> I do read and write >>> C everyday for probably for more than 10 years now, yet I do have >>> trouble reading systemd's code, but that's not important, what is >>> important is that in order to test my modifications (to add debugging >>> for example), I would need to *recompile*. >> >> I'm aware that you are a professional, that's why I find your claims >> about the difficulty of understanding/recompiling... odd. By contrast, >> my C skills/experience are virtually nonexistent, and yet I have had >> no problems understanding/debugging/recompiling/patching the systemd >> code. > > It's not my claims, it's a fact; compiling is more complicated than > not-compiling (one step less), and you need a compiler, and linker > (and in some systems development packages), and sometimes deploying > the binaries. With scripting you don't need any of that; after you are > done editing the text (which you have to do regardless), you are done. > >>> Well, I see absolutely no evidence of such an analysis, so consider me >>> a skeptic. >> >> That's ok. We are not in the PR business, we are not selling anything. > > You are selling a distribution. When Arch Linux stops giving the users > what they want, the users will go for a different distribution. That's > how distributions die; when something better is on the market for most > of their users. Arch is always give user's their options they want. You can use initscript, even if systemd is the default just like I can use systemd now when initscript is the default. Switch from one to another is very easy. So use systemd as default does not means you can not use initscript. But if one day, most of the developer find systemd is more easier to use maintain, they will stop maintain initscript. And it may rot, so can not be used. When this happened, if you still think initscript is easier to maintain, you can adopt it as a new maintainer and used them till the world ends. Leon > > Cheers. > > -- > Felipe Contreras
