Gregory's Server
@DrHyde @SetOfAllSets @gkrnours You know no one has at any point yet given me a reason to dislike systemd except "it is not old thing" and I didn't actually like old thing. I guess I kind of liked Upstart but certainly not the weird script mess that predated it. Whatever that was called. Boot.d or something
|
10 comments
 @SetOfAllSets @mcc @gkrnours starting things in parallel is a neat trick, but not terribly useful unless you're spawning VMs all the time - and if you are flinging VMs around like confetti you probably won't be running much on each machine so surely the benefit mostly goes away. @SetOfAllSets @mcc @DrHyde @gkrnours it seems all good ideas eventually accumulate baggage. @bassplayer @mcc @DrHyde @gkrnours the good idea isn't the baggage for me, it's the over expansion into areas unrelated to the init system @SetOfAllSets @mcc @DrHyde @gkrnours I don't think I said that. I only meant that things start out very lean and specific and end up up having so much added to them and the new thing is developed which is specific and efficient and the process seems to start all over. Also would you not call the new OS linuxctl since every command has ctl appended to it. :D @bassplayer @mcc @DrHyde @gkrnours ah ok, I misunderstood, also the OS would be unix-like (except when it's not)  @mcc @DrHyde @SetOfAllSets @gkrnours personally I've had systemd brick computers because grub failed to update and systemd mounts EFIVARS as r/w When DW run an a poll on init systems a few years ago, OpenRC, Runit, & s6 took 66% of the vote. Most industrial marketing rags will have you believe otherwise, that people like what they push down our throats.  |
@mcc @DrHyde @gkrnours I dislike systemd because it eats everything and turns it into a part of itself, it's like the polar opposite of KISS.
Edit: and I do like how it starts services in parallel, I'm doing something similar with my package manager for example, it's a good idea, it just comes with the baggage of systemd being systemd.