Hi Kevin, There's honestly a mountain-load of crap here, so I'm going to snip most of them out. It would be nice if you could keep the propaganda-like walls of text, irrelevant examples, and disclaimers to the minimum.
On 22/11/2012 11:49, Kevin Toppins wrote: > [...] > -> What role is systemd designed to facilitate? An init daemon. But why don't you ask yourself -- what role(s) should an init daemon play anyway? > [...] Blah blah blah. More point less fluff please. This isn't an English essay that requires a fluffed up word count. >> I think you started heads on with a fundamental misunderstanding. >> The .service file is not systemd having “knowledge” on a given daemon. >> It describes the behavior of the daemon. It is written by the same >> people as the daemon itself. > > > I never said having knowledge. > > I said *presuming* to have knowledge. > > -> Wikitionary : Presume : To perform, do (something) without > authority; to lay claim to without permission. > > The problem with you thinking it's not systemd presuming to know is that..... > > -> The authors have to write the file to specifications established > by *systemd* > > http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd.service.html I clicked the link, read through it, and it looks like it allows you to describe the lifecycle of the daemon -- how it starts, how it ends, if it should be restarted if it ends, what it requires to be started up before it starts up. I don't see systemd presuming to know anything about what the daemon does once it's started up. You on the other hand, seem to be spewing crap that implies that you think that the entire daemon is programmed inside the service file. > I would appreciate it if you would give this and my other posts some > reflection. I think we have a problem. I am hoping others will begin > to recognize it, or at least consider how systemd rationalizes itself > against the questions I ask here... I think you have a problem. -- Kind regards, Loong Jin
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
