Linked by jessesmith on Wed 5th Nov 2014 10:39 UTC
Linux Over the past year I've been reading a lot of opinions on the new init technology, systemd. Some people think systemd is wonderful, the bee's knees. Others claim that systemd is broken by design. Some see systemd as a unifying force, a way to unite the majority of the Linux distributions. Others see systemd as a growing blob that is slowly becoming an overly large portion of the operating system. One thing that has surprised me a little is just how much people care about systemd, whether their opinion of the technology is good or bad. People in favour faithfully (and sometimes falsely) make wonderful claims about what systemd is and what it can supposedly do. Opponents claim systemd will divide the Linux community and drive many technical users to other operating systems. There is a lot of hype and surprisingly few people presenting facts.
Permalink for comment 599168
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: A cople of comments.
by gilboa on Thu 6th Nov 2014 16:54 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: A cople of comments."
Member since:

It's relevant in the sense that the original approach taken when developing FOSS software is essentially gone. Since Debian is a volunteer based effort, they're sensible to this change. As you point out that holds true for the kernel and various other technologies (browsers, GUI toolkits, etc...).

Leave Debian and other volunteer based distributions one of two options: Go with the flow, or face stagnation.

Why? I never said it was the wrong decision, it's most likely the right one as I had mentioned below. Systemd *has* its merits (a phrase you seem to have missed from my post) but it's not a volunteer based effort and it's becoming the default in Debian because no other projects has the economical resources to take on a commercial entity such as RedHat. That doesn't compare to something like the traditional discussion about which software is better in the FOSS community. Simply put, there's no alternative and that's why it's being chosen.

I agree that it doesn't.
One side is willing to put a lot of resources on developing a new modern base system infrastructure while the other side, *unlike* VI/emacs, KDE/GNOME or BSD/Linux that actually set out to drive their own unique view of such a solution, are currently limited to to very vocal, border-line abusive forum activists that define themselves by what they hate, as opposed to what they want to achieve.

Place the blame of RedHat for actually trying to be constructive is plain wrong.

Huh? I never mentioned oppressed non-systemd distributions. Personally I'm using Fedora which has been using systemd for a while. Did my mention of systemd being a paid-for commercial effort just like MacOS X or Windows somehow hurt your feelings for it? You seem to be overreacting.

My comment was not directed at you personally, and you know it.
You personal attach was childish and uncalled for.

- Gilboa

Reply Parent Score: 3