Re: SystemD poll

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]



On 22.08.2012 02:10, Felipe Contreras wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Patrick Murphy <thegerdur@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Could you give me a brief explanation as to why init scripts are better?
I'm newish to Unix style operating systems
As I said; they are tried-and-true since *decades*, all the problems
have been ironed out by slow small changes, so if somebody has
problems they are probably hitting very few people.

Switching to systemd is not a small change, it's a revolutionary
change, with the potential to break many people's boot (it has broken
things in Fedora, and openSUSE, and it's happening in Arch Linux as
well). So, a sensible person would wait until a sensible time to make
the big switch (which is clearly not now).


Arch is not sensible in the conservative sense. Being conservative here means waiting for others to make the software more stable. This is not really what Arch is about. We regularly move to software that is just-about-enough stable to be used. As far as I am concerned, systemd is at that point since I was able to convert my laptop to it without any problems at all. We also did this with Python 3 and regularly do it with all kinds of small packages

We move at this rapid fashion because we are pretty much the snow plow of Linux distros. We sometimes break parts in our systems so that the ecosystem as a whole can improve more rapidly. If you can't get into that, Arch isn't for you. We get to use all the newest software with all its shiny new features and the trade-off is that sometimes things break. On the other hand, our breakages improve the quality of the software as a whole for everybody else. Some upstreams very much appreciate a large user base for new releases to iron out any errors quickly.

Arch is also about practicality and pragmatism. If everybody moves to some software that is conceptually less simple than currently used software, we might move to use that as well. If we do not in such a case, it might mean we would have to maintain the old software that no ones cares about anymore ourselves which would actually complicate matters as suddenly that old software would essentially become and Arch project. Think about it like this: In Arch we try to find the best meta-simplicity. That is, you don't just need to consider conceptual or technical simplicity but also other fairly transparent factors that you might only be able to spot if you are more experienced such as burden-of-maintenance and community support.


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]
  Powered by Linux