El Sun, 4 de May 2014 a las 5:59 PM, Marco d'Itri <m...@linux.it>
escribió:
On May 05, Cameron Norman <camerontnor...@gmail.com> wrote:
Example one: someone does not need logind, but removing it would
remove
their init system.
So do not try to do it.
Constructive solution you have got there.
Example two: someone needs logind, but they do not need binfmt,
nspawn, or
networkd. Removing any of those would remove the init system, their
window
manager, most of their desktop environment, and their login manager.
There is no need to remove any of these components even if you are
not
using them.
4
I understand just fine how it is packaged. It is packaged in a way that
pushes components down other's throats and tells users to simply
disable them if they are not necessary.
This is incredibly unfair to those components' competitors because it
is not a fair playing field. Some authors (those that do their work in
the systemd source tree) get higher preference to others (those that
prefer to not create a monolithic source tree, do not like systemd's
license, do not like people to have commit access to their project
unless they have earned it, and an array of more valid reasons).
Please come back when you will.
I feel this statement is condescending, rude, alienating, and
dictatorial. Do not act this way toward me; I do not appreciate it.
Nos vemos,
--
Cameron
