On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 02:21:40PM +0100, Sylvain CANOINE wrote:
>
> >> I'm also still trying to figure out in what way systemd is supposed to
> >> be "better".
> >
> > https://wiki.debian.org/Debate/initsystem/systemd#Why_Debian_should_default_to_systemd
> >
> Counter-arguments are easy to find as well. For example :
> http://judecnelson.blogspot.fr/2014/09/systemd-biggest-fallacies.html
I've seen these counter-arguments. It's not really a direct response
to Debian's arguments. Its just a list of "fallacies" used to support
systemd. I agree that some arguments pro-systemd are poor arguments,
but many of the technical arguments anti-systemd seem to boil down to:
"You can do this will SysVinit/xinetd/something else. Its just
that nobody has done that yet" or "SysVinit can do this if we just fix
all the init scripts." I agree that it is possible, but years of
trying have never managed to do it.
For what its worth, I've already seen one vendor (to be left unnamed)
provide AWFUL systemd service units that seem to prove Douglas Adams
famous quote: "...a common mistake that people make when trying to
design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the
ingenuity of complete fools."
--
Jonathan Billings <billings@xxxxxxxxxx>
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
