> > Of course the Big Bang theory is morphing with one option being many > > Big Bang's and that it was a point in history and not the beginning > > which is perfectly plausible and systemd may morph sufficiently for > > more users too, in time. I care little though (except any consequences) > > and don't hold a great deal of hope in that regard because systemd tells > > us what to do and not us telling systemd what to do and so it can never > > fit everyone's needs as init scripts can, as to do so, it wouldn't be > > systemd any more. > > > > -- > > _______________________________________________________________________ > > > > 'Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work > > together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a > > universal interface' > > > > (Doug McIlroy) > > _______________________________________________________________________ > > > > > Wow, this is way off base. Anyway, you may also wish to look into > the argument from ignorance; the fact that you fail to understand something > doesn't make it untrue. I have to admit I'd be interested to know who you > get > information on theoretical physics from, since you seem to think theoretical > physicists aren't reliable authorities on the subject. I'm also getting > tired of > seeing folks completely misunderstand how the "burden of proof" works > (hint: It always lies with the claimant). > Seems the systemd advocating Trolls continue to shoot down without saying a thing. You missed the point, a fact can be obtained and a theory discounted without understanding the "complete origins of the universe" which no one can satisfy without mentioning God. The consensus was wrong and believed to be all but proved and those very physicists are now saying so due to those who grew up asking questions in the classroom realising more and more that the lecturer was wrong and the attention and work refocussed on new more likely ideas with new flaws. So you really believe the old theory that a single Big bang started the universe and which and is more likely a multiverse. A term concocted I suppose to stop treading on peoples toes. I suppose you believe in string theory too and going faster than light puts you in the past rather than just seeing the past, but enough digressing. This work will likely never end but good does come of it. I suppose you blindly believe everything physicists and Lennart says. Kindly tell me privately what you believe is 'on base' currently as I won't spam this list any more. I'd be shocked, if it was credible, though it may be interesting and answer some questions leading to new ones. > Back on track: You and I have different standards for complexity. A few > dozen > lines of code accomplishing a multi-faceted task can easily be considered > complex. systemd can be just as modular as you like, if you learn your way > around it. /sbin/init does not demand a few dozen lines of code unless you wish so. It is not as modular as you like without study, a major rewrite and recompilation. I guess you missed the posts about embedded and Android and busybox using an init system leaner than the usual /sbin/init. You also seem to have missed or ignored the points about complex kernel requirements etc. that it wants to apply to every system and contrary to the arch way 2.0. -- _______________________________________________________________________ 'Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a universal interface' (Doug McIlroy) _______________________________________________________________________
