On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 11:25:47AM -0700, Per Bothner wrote: > On 04/26/2011 11:18 AM, Michal Jaegermann wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 03:56:26PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > >> systemd comes with extensive documentation and your typical response to > >> all changes isn't applicable here. If you are going to claim lack of > >> documentation, can you be more specific? > >> > >> http://0pointer.de/public/systemd-man/ > >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Systemd > > > > That includes links to such "perls of wisdom" as > > http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken > > which in effect says: "I broke it and I totally do not care. Anyway, > > this is all your fault as you are stupid enough to run a system > > laid out not the way I like it." Why I am not surprised? > > Did you read it? It actually says "I did not break it - it's been > broken for a while in a number of different ways". Yes, I read it. That is a very feeble excuse as what's "been broken for a while" works just fine now so that claim is at least stretching reality. Watching for some time on lkml how kernel developers try to avoid breaking existing working systems could be educational. Michal -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
