On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 15:16:18 +0200 deloptes <deloptes@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > E. Liddell wrote: > > > Sigh. I have seen *so many* of these arguments spattered across the > > Internet. Like vi versus emacs, it's become a religious dispute that > > doesn't allow for objective discussion of merits. Please don't beat a > > dead horse. Just accept that some people dislike or mistrust systemd, and > > move on. The alternatives *are* being maintained and are perfectly > > serviceable. > > > > To answer the OP's question: While Gentoo is OpenRC by default, I don't > > recommend it for your case, because getting TDE installed here is a > > non-trivial undertaking. I keep meaning to try again to do something > > about that. > > I think it is more important to understand the problem, than to answer the > question, because the question might be based on outdated or invalid > information. If you read mail threads about systemd (and I myself wrote > some) from 4-5y ago you get a very wrong impression. Many people dislike systemd because of the philosophy behind it, because of the general behaviour of Red Hat and the people working for that company, or because they know the behaviour of sysvinit and how to tune it for their use case very well and don't want to have to relearn everything. There aren't very many people still holding out for purely technical reasons. In other words, the "problem" is probably that systemd is systemd. There are others who've already tried it and didn't like it and aren't interested in you trying to refute their reasons point-by-point if they even remember them anymore. All you'll do by trying is raise the temperature in here . . . because the problem isn't the specific features that were buggy or didn't work, it's that the software was released at all in a state that wasn't ready for use where these people were concerned, and gave them a bad impression. You can't fix that without a time machine. > There are couple of good videos on that topic that help understand the > problem and the decision to build and history of systemd. > > As for the systemd free distro question: One must decide first if it should > be really systemd free (means systemd removed completely) or systemd is not > the init system. How about "systemd was never installed"? It is still possible, you know. > The first case is what I think can be handled as a dead horse or > neandertals - you will loose a lot of applications and functionality that > can not be provided without system. > The second approach is in my opinion acceptable if systemd causes problems > as init manager. I am quite content with the featureset OpenRC provides. So are many other people. There are very, *very* few pieces of software that unconditionally depend on systemd and can't have that support disabled at compile time or easily patched out (Gnome is the only one I'm aware of at this time, and this list is not exactly full of Gnome users). If you like systemd, then by all means use it, but please don't try to push others into doing so. It's as unwelcome as someone coming to this list to push the current incarnation of KDE. E. Liddell --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: trinity-users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx For additional commands, e-mail: trinity-users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Read list messages on the web archive: http://trinity-users.pearsoncomputing.net/ Please remember not to top-post: http://trinity.pearsoncomputing.net/mailing_lists/#top-posting
