On 28/09/14 04:49, lee wrote: > Scott Ferguson <scott.ferguson.debian.u...@gmail.com> writes: > >> On 26/09/14 07:34, lee wrote: >>> Darac Marjal <mailingl...@darac.org.uk> writes: >>> >>>>> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 03:04:24PM +0200, lee wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Systemd can handle the boot process from head to toe, >>>>>> without needing to use any of the existing shell scripts. >>>>> >>>>> That's how systemd makes the boot process cryptic and >>>>> non-debuggable. >>>> >>>> If you can understand start-stop-daemon, I'm sure systemd isn't >>>> much harder. >>> >>> I never needed to understand it. >> >> Noted. (and adequately demonstrated that you don't understand it - >> it "just works for you" - like systemd does). > > It works only as long as it does.
Insightful. > I've seen how difficult it is to do a very simple thing with > systemd, Do you have a constructive example - or is the wingeRUS list? I'm presuming you wish to improve the situation? > how poor the documentation is Obviously that is something that needs improving then. You could help by stating the areas you find lacking - perhaps even tell us a bit about where you looked? I'm not a real slow reader but even so I've found all those man files a bit of a chore to read - it's going to take me a long time to "get my head around it" (it's hard being old). > and how confused the developers are. Are they? Which developers? This a lot of information to take on board! > When systemd fails, chance to fix it are as good as non-existent. Ipso facto?? > >>>>>> Systemd unit files, unlike SysV scripts, can usually be >>>>>> shipped by upstream, or at least shared with other >>>>>> distributions (already more than 1000 existing unit files >>>>>> in Fedora) without any changes, the Debian specifics being >>>>>> handled by systemd itself. >>>>> >>>>> So Debian even has its own version of systemd to make things >>>>> more complicated. >>>> >>>> Debian has it's own idiosyncrasies of sysvinit, so this is a >>>> point to neither side. >>> >>> They are simple scripts which are easy to understand. >> >> Either you understand it or you don't. Pick one. It's an approach >> that may lead to principles and credibility (at the possible cost >> of self-righteousness - bonus!). > > What are you trying to say? Something like "It doesn't matter when > you write everything in Japanese because someone either understands > it or not."? Does it? How very interesting. > >>>> Users DO get a vote. Every time you download an ISO for debian, >>>> that's a vote. Every time you install a system as debian, >>>> that's a vote. >>> >>> It would be a vote nobody knows or cares about. >> >> >> It's a personal choice. If you require a crowd of support as moral >> justification you're doing it wrong. > > Just ask yourself: Why would someone choose to download an ISO for > Debian? I'm not sure how that is an answer to the question I asked. Would you be so kind as to answer my question please? The answer to your random question is - because they wish install Debian. Please start a new thread for new questions. > >>>> As has been mentioned several times on this list, the best way >>>> to get systemd out of debian is to develop an init system that >>>> is technically superior to systemd. [...] >>> >>> There seems to be quite some disagreement about systemds' >>> technical superiority. >>> >>>> When your new init system is ready for show time, either submit >>>> it to debian (if you'd like debian to lead the way) or create >>>> your own distribution to showcase the init system. Let people >>>> see the ease with which your new system tackles the problems of >>>> both sysvinit and systemd. Let them play with it and marvel at >>>> the clean, robust code. >>>> >>>> We look forward to the fruits of your efforts! >>> >>> That'll be a long wait. Even if I made another init system, it >>> would be ignored like everything else. >> >> Circular logic much? And it justifies what? Others doing the work >> for you - on the basis that you've previously *alleged* your "work" >> was unfairly rejected in the past. If 'it' is Open Source, not >> some hypocritical SLitt license, then provide a link and let the >> code speak for itself. > > It gives me reason not to waste my time with making software for > others. Your call, obviously. > There are other reasons to do it, and I might give out what I make > as open source or keep it for myself. That's probably along the > lines of what most people do. Whatever. > > If you want a link, Please do - I'm open to trying other init systems. I've posted one in another thread earlier today. > Perhaps you want to play some sort of childish game here about who > made the most software, so what software did you make? > > Or perhaps you don't realise that you got things the wrong way > round. Clearly not. (I can be a bit thick). Kind regards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54274607.3000...@gmail.com
