On 01/26/2016 10:33 AM, Always Learning wrote: > > On Tue, 2016-01-26 at 09:11 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > >> Definitely. But please don't show up ranting about systemd unless you >> genuinely have something new and insightful to add. We have literally >> been discussing moving to an improved init system since 2005: >> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/Y6PUIY3HOPVKA5IUJQ5TL6WAVTE3G4KY/ >> and in that decade, pretty much everything to be said _has_ been said >> and considered. That is, we've *been through* the independent analysis >> of systemd. > > Is systemd the beneficial, reliable, useful and workable "improved init > system" or something with circa 275,000 lines of coding compared to > init's circa 10,000 lines ? Things I have learned in programming > include modular is better than monolithic, and less code better than > M$-style bloatware which systemd appears to be. > > Just what is Fedora's and Red Hat's Plan B when the revolt against > systemd escalates ? Whom is going to apologise for fouling-up Red > Hat's EL and our beloved Centos ? > > > There is no plan B .. use it or use something else. Its not like Debian, Ubuntu, SUSE have decided to not use systemd. EL6 is good for 4 more years, it does not have systemd. BSD doesn't use systemd. systemd is even more important with containers. That's just how it is. If people don't like what Linux does to the kernel .. they can fork it and do something else. If people don't like systemd .. they can fork it and do something else. That's what open source is all about.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
