On 10/22/2014 08:47 PM, Sam M. wrote:
I am not Aaron or Dirk or Banga Gong. I'm not the only person on this list that is questioning System D. I understand that you are offended by his insults and I share your sentiments, but I'm not him.
Indeed. You top post. He doesn't. But you, like him and the others you mention, don't seem to have a reasoned argument as to why not systemd. It seems to be all emotion and hatred of individuals, if not me, then of Poettering for taking the initiative to replace a flawed procedural based application with a much more flexible and extendible declarative based one, and in doing so applied many of the good programming practices we associate with leading edge software development such as "Don't repeat yourself" (DRY), code reuse (by factoring other functions to use common libraries and utilities), aggressive refactoring. So much of the way sysvinit works is WET - "We Enjoy Typing", sometimes referred to as 'stamp coding". Having begun life in hardware I like the idea of deterministic state machines and clear dependency paths. I've always hated debugging sysvinit scripts for the same reason I hate so many C programs and java programs. Too much is hidden in the individual idiosyncrasies of the programmer. Its not as if all the sysvinit scripts had the same author. Very different from the days of V6 and V7 :-) Dennis may have been idiosyncratic too, but he was just one guy. If the answer is that you are a code guy and don't grok state machines, then fine, I can appreciate that. Just don't take it out on me. I massively prefer administering & configuring a systemd based machine over a sysvinit machine. -- A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org