On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Frank Peters <frank.pet...@comcast.net> wrote: > On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 13:22:28 -0500 > Canek Peláez Valdés <can...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> As a professional programmer, I completely disagree with any dogma >> based on "philosophy" rather than technical merits. >> >> "So I think many of the "original ideals" of UNIX are these days more >> of a mindset issue than necessarily reflecting reality of the >> situation. >> > > That's not the issue here at all. The issue is the possible > hegemony being imposed by systemd. Whether or not this is true > this issue at least deserves some attention.
It's free software, as long as there is developers willing to work on alternatives, there will be alternatives. > Regarding the "Unix philosophy," I doubt that anyone still considers > that a "pipeline of simple tools" is the ideal approach. Software > has assumed gigantic proportions (to match hardware capabilities) of > late and that traditional Unix model certainly would never fit. Agreed. > But not all software is gigantic. I would venture a guess that > a large majority of programs are simple one-off concoctions designed > to meet some simple individual need. In these cases it sure is nice > to have the standard Unix tools available. I use them frequently > for various simple purposes. They are free software. You can keep them forever. > Regarding the booting and configuring of a Linux system, the job can be > either very complex or very simple. For the simple case, is there > technical merit in having to use systemd? I would claim that there > is not. For complex scenarios, by all means utilize systemd. > But let's keep the appropriate tools available for the appropriate job. Who's going to take them away? And besides, it is FREE SOFTWARE. Clone the repositories, and keep a personal copy around forever if you like. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
