El Sat, 29 de Mar 2014 a las 11:51 AM, Jan Gloser
<jan.renra.glo...@gmail.com> escribió:
> Now that systemd has wrecked all kinds of previously working stuff,
and many are beginning to realize the *impossibility* of getting
systemd to > work *with* linux -> I think this might have some effect
this time around.
Hello everybody,
I've been watching this discussion, quite curious what would come up
and now that I have read some responses I would like to say that
[snip]
I would also like to ask something the people who dislike systemd (as
there seem to be more). I am not very proficient with such internals
of debian, but you say things like systemd breaks things and systemd
has no unified design and sytemd is possibly a security risk. But can
you give some easily reproducible examples or setups, code samples,
cucumber scenarios, whatever, that could clearly demonstrate how
systemd breaks anything? Otherwise it's very hard for me to judge
anything if I can't play around with it and truly see for myself that
it's so EVIL. Otherwise if you just personally disagree with the
design of systemd and can't describe such a scenario, why not just
migrate to Gentoo or BSD?
systemd lacks the immense extensibility of Upstart. One example of this
is udev integration. Upstart integrates with udev through an out of
process (not PID1) bridge which emits events. This integration could
have easily been done outside of Upstart's source tree, or with any
other device event daemon (e.g. FreeBSD's devd, which listens to /dev
for device events and reacts to them). This extensibility: keeps PID1
small and minimal, so that unneeded bridges can easily be disable on
more streamlined and specific setups; rips away licensing restrictions
and contributor agreements; allows for disagreements and difficulties
with upstream to be avoided; and finally increases portability of the
init system.
Cheers,
--
Cameron Norman
