On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto <denisfalqueto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Felipe Contreras > <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Brandon Watkins <bwat47@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> A big switch like this will have problems regardless of when you do it. Its >>> best to do it soon and get the teething issues over with. For most people >>> systemd seems to work fine and is production ready (also evidenced by the >>> fact that some other major distros have already made the switch some time >>> ago). >> >> It is best to do it sooner? Why? In order to maximize the breakage? > > You see, that's the attitude that really enfuriates me. Why post in > such a provocative tone? He gave his arguments, you didn't reply. No, he didn't, he made a totally unsupported claim with no evidence, and not even an argument "Its best to do it soon and get the teething issues over with.". The rest of his arguments are irrelevant, and in order to tackle them one would need to understand that it's impossible to prove a negative, but you seem to be unable to understand that, so I'm not going to try to explain it. But there's no point in even trying, because even if we assume he is right for the sake of argument (systemd is quite ready (it's not)), that still doesn't invalidate the first argument: the later the move, the safer. > You > just bitch cause you don't want to spend the time to fix your > problems. I sent you some hints to debug systemd boot process and you > ignored it. And now I will send you another one (see, I'm in a > pacifist mood today): > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_Systemd_problems > > I've found it in the bottom of the Arch wiki page for systemd. So, > it's not hard to find information on how to solve problems. Please. Not even Lennart was able to help me with my problem. Stop assuming there was/is an easy solution. Cheers. -- Felipe Contreras
