^ Similar to discussions I have been raising on the the IRC...
I'll post some of it here...
why is arch and fedora and redhat and all the others using systemd not being blown the fuck out of the water for being such idiots for switching to systemd?
Because it works and they are satisfied that it works. See post #39
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic....49530#p1149530so if I am running systemd on all I do (builds, maintaining websites, support blah blah blah) does that say anything about it being worthy?
Not sure I understand this one. If you are saying if I can do my work and I don't notice systemd is even there isn't that a good thing. Which I think is what you are asking, then yes. So far I have been able to do all my core stuff with no issues.
At what levels is it measured? (success or failures)
It doesn't seem to be measured. A point I raised earlier and is driving me crazy. Perhaps the measurement is in fact your first point. Siduction, Arch, Fedora (not dumbarses that group) all have embraced it. Isn't that success to some extent?
does MS shills ever question init changes... fuck no, we have the pleasure of even being in this init discussion
IMO, it shows just how open foss is... where two different directions (and more) can be dropped in as a install and go replacement to such a massive integral part of the linux ecosystem
True, great point. The fact that we can also talk about brewing our own.
can replacing sysvinit with systemd really be this 'bad' if: 1: Install replace boot up go 2: Everything I do is working just like nothing happened 3: better memory management? (or so it seems in my tests)
I am finding the same. [edit] In a sense what better situation can we ask for? I am beginning to wonder if this is a case of so badly wanting to find something wrong with accepting it that we create the illusion that it needs to pass another test to prove it's worth. Cue my ex-wife nodding
[/edit]
but all of that leads to 4: If ya (systemd) ain't breaking something, just what are you doing? (where is the direct output of what is going on under the covers with systemd)
It's pretty well documented. It's just verbose, confusing because it's new and a little hard to grok because I am at least not a person who flies at this level (concerned with event monitoring and the like versus script initing). [edit]For a real in depth understanding of what it is doing see the Fedora link below.[/edit]
what is another massive part of the ecosystem that had to change and did despite all the foreblowing of dooooooom? and succeeded...
Grub was like that without the personalities involved. Gnome 3 was like that. Pulse Audio still is but I think in the end it has been a success. I probably could think of others but you get it.
It really is too bad that the license shit is there for upstart (and canonical) and Lennart is there ... it would be cool to discuss this without those alienating variables
Thoughts from v-ger, nothing more
Good thoughts and well said about the license and Lennart. Oh and here is a contrary view
http://draketo.de/light/english/top-5-systemd-troubles I have also started reading this
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Systemd which is very informative.
