On 07/19/2014 09:05 AM, Always Learning wrote: > On Sat, 2014-07-19 at 09:08 +0300, Veli-Pekka Kestilä wrote: > >> It is actually funny how there seems to be so many opponents of systemd >> who want back the old ways of doing things. > These are the causes:- > > 1. Familiarity with something that works and can be modified without > much effort- very important consideration in the computer world. > > 2. "Conservative" because new software is renown for creating "time > wasting" frustration and irritation and sometimes "breakdowns". > > 3. Adherer to the principle "If it is working, do not repair or replace > it". > > 4. Lack of knowledge about the replacement. > > > The systemd files do look like Windoze .ini files. > > Well .. all of that may be true and systemd may be the devil ... but we would still have it as CentOS-7 rebuilds RHEL-7 sources. Debating whether or not systemd is a good idea is not relevant for CentOS. It is upstream, it is default, therefore it will be installed. That's just how it is. We just had a bazillion mail thread on systemd and how it is terrible, we don't need any more. If you want to see systemd taken out of CentOS ... then figure out how to take it out.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
