On 11/04/17 17:02, Bruce Ferrell wrote: > On 04/11/2017 07:50 AM, Andrew Holway wrote: >>> I'd much rather have a bash script to look at-- and manually step >>> through. >> >> Is that a joke? Bash is an almighty impenetrable nightmare. I've been >> doing >> *nix for nearly 10 years and *still* am unable to read anything vaguely >> complicated in bash whereas I can write fairly decent python after 6 >> months. From my point of view SystemD is amazing I can write a 6 line >> service file for my apps and it *just works* and I don't have to think >> about it anymore. >> >> What is it about SystemD that brings out the Richard Stallman in >> everyone? >> _______________________________________________ >> CentOS mailing list >> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx >> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >> > *10 WHOLE years*... And bash is *STILL* impenetrable for you? > > How about over 30 and it took me a week? No, I don't carry a CS degree > or cert of any kind either, just some high school. > > For me, systemd has been an absolute nightmare of unexpected reboots and > non-transparently broken processes with just plain bad implementations > crammed onto my system. Faster boot they said, except it ISN'T faster > now, it's slower and MUCH more difficult to sort through to find out why > with it's monolithic architecture and poor documentation. > > It wasn't broken before. What was being fixed? > Boot speed isn't everything. My servers take far longer to initialise than boot, so having to repeat the boot to sort out the black magic takes __much__ longer than having a steppable script.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
