Todd Rme wrote:
You, and other members of the anti-systemd crowd,...
Lets call it what it is... the pro-choice crowd, and the no-choice crowd, as that is probably the biggest sticking point with most people. Many people don't like dictatorships and being told what to do. It's not relevant what the features of the no-choice camp are, because historically we've never seen one what has had happy citizens. So please forgive our continued attempts to ask for choice. Freedom of choice, a basic freedom in a free society is one of those things that much constantly be fought for -- and it doesn't come overnight and isn't lost in 1 battle or not (though the 1984-authoritarians would love to perpetuate the myth that there can never be change).
Projects voluntarily chose to join systemd because they thought it would benefit their project.
Some did... some didn't -- those that didn't weren't given a choice...they were absorbed. Several on here have documented active sabotage to remove any possibility of choice in the upcoming release. This is an established fact. There is no argument needed.
Distros voluntarily chose to adopt systemd because they thought it made handling init easier compared to the alternatives. Desktop environments chose to adopt systemd because it provides features they think are useful that aren't available anywhere else.
Providing secure boot is a priority to keep linux in the game as a 'controllable platform' that can be used to supply content and compete with Apple and MS. That's NOT what many use linux for, but it is what those with big $$$ signs in their eyes primarily focus on.
As far as I can tell, you are essentially arguing that because you don't like systemd and don't find it useful, all the groups that do find it useful aren't allowed to rely on it. There is a simple solution: have something else that provides the features these projects are looking for.
---- I had 90% of the features I wanted, and the ability to implement ones I didn't have. With systemd, I won't have that ability, because there will be no place for alternatives.
But you aren't going to get very far trying to tell projects that they can't make use of features they find beneficial at all because you don't happen to like the software that provides those features.
I agree some features are beneficial, but I want the a la carte menu. It could be provided, but part of the systemd design is to eliminate possibilities of ala carte usage and partial use. What was the MS motto -- systemd sure seems to have it down pat: Embrace, Extend, Extinguish... Ms eventually got brought under control because it was a monopoly and used it's monopoly power to aborb the functions of more and more programs, putting alternitives out of business. Not that I think it likely anti-monopoly laws would apply here, but in the business world, those actions were found *unethical* and unfair against other alternatives. Many courts ruled this way. So if you can't see how the same actions in the software community wouldn't cause similar if not equal antipathy, you aren't trying.
Whether you find the features of systemd useful is irrelevant. As long as systemd and only systemd provides the features that projects are looking for, those projects are going to use systemd. The anti-systemd crowd needs to start putting in the work to provide alternatives, or systemd usage is just going to keep growing.
---- The alternatives were there. LP chose to absorb, extend and extinguish them. I still say system auditing would have provided all the process tracking in real time that he needed to provide a service manager -- he didn't need p1. But think he'd change that? being #1 pid gives hime power over the whole system in a way that can be exploited. It will be interesting when he wants to integrate systemd more into the kernel and take it over how Linus will respond.....If we are lucky he'll choose to go off and invent a whole knew OS, and linux can get back to doing what it does best -- provide freedom and choice. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org