Anton Aylward wrote:
On 06/04/2014 08:26 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
[ Big Snip ]
What Carlos is saying, what I'm saying, is that this is Linux and its configurable. Its as configurable to the degree that you want to put the effort in to make it so.
Different distributions have varying packaging, philosophies and defaults.
Be thankful, but don't complain that when you buy a GM that its over-engineered since the wheels have 5 lugs whereas Ford has clearly demonstrated that you only need four to hold the wheel on.
No, you're not getting it. If the systemd miscreants were in the automobile tire business, they would be trying to tell us how much better their 64-sided tires are so much better than 8-sided tires... entirely missing the point that TIRES ARE SUPPOSED TO BE ROUND, not polygonal. All of these "features" in systemd are not beneficial, because they are all tied into ONE executable...one thing we know is that modularity is FAR FAR FAR superior to integration. Modularity forces a discipline on design that need not be observed with massive integration -- thereby allowing sloppy constructs. The point is NOT to have more and more features to the program... . The history of computing is litered with the various corpses of huge, intricate systems which try to do EVERYTHING i in one process or one piece of code. This creates a structure which is brittle. OS/360 is a perfect example -- over time, the number of bugs remained constant, because on average, patching one bug would create another. MULTICS was an overall failure for similar reasons. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org