On 07/19/2014 11:10 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > 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. NOTE: That post was not specifically at "Always Learning" .. that just happened to be the mail in this thread I was reading at the time.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
