2011/12/28 Michal Kubeček <mkubecek@suse.cz>:
I agree with the move. systemd goes forward in some areas.
I don't. So far, I haven't seen any (useful) feature that systemd would provide that couldn't be with much less effort achived without it. On the other hand, it brings a lot of problems and complicates things that used to be simple and easy. Some features aren't provided at all and when people point it out, the answer is "you shouldn't want them because systemd doesn't provide them". Saving (possibly) few seconds of boot time is not worth the trouble.
Well, if you don't read the whole post, yes, I can see how you would answer like that. I think just the same. But some stuff *is* a lot easier to maintain with systemd. There's no denying. The problem is its shortsightedness and its refusal to, as you say, implement the features system administrators need. So maybe systemd is an experiment and maybe there will be a superd that supersedes it and fixes all of its mistakes while embracing all of what it did right. Or maybe systemd *can* be fixed. Point is, systemd *does* introduce some forward features, and the community *is* seeking for a sysvinit replacement. If it will be systemd or a successor I don't know. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org