systemd plans

[hiro]

i tried to understand what get-the-facts stuff you're talking about, but sadly "the page you requested cannot be found"
the link was cited on wikipedia: http://www.microsoft.com/err/windowsserver/facts/
if you ask me the real facts are: both MS and linux software is a huge complex mess, and tinycore does a nice amount of preselection to keep our heads clear for whatever awful stuff we all need to acchieve with these machines from hell.

[hiro]

Wow, thanks! I have not seen such concentration of FUD and outright lies since MS published get-the-facts.

are you perhaps talking about these crazy attempts of propaganda:

?

[suare]

I'm sure we're all interested in your detailed account on how exactly Landley lies.

He claims: blah-blah... Even if you were interested in cloning it (or a compatible subset of it), there's no "it" to clone. No spec, no clear goal... blah-blah...

Debunking this nonsense in trivial. Let me assist you with that:
1. Open browser.
2. Type "google.com"
3. Press enter.
4. Enter is a big key on the right side of keyboard
5. type "systemd api" and press enter again

Most likely the very first thing you'll get is http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/InterfacePortabilityAndStabilityChart/

Now, do you need me to help you learn double-clicking?

[curaga]

That kind of attitude is not welcome here. Once more and you're banned.

[tinypoodle]

double-clicking? seriously now?   

[bmarkus]

Nice:

Note that not all of these interfaces are our invention (but most), we just adopted them in systemd to make them more prominently implemented. For example, we adopted many Debian facilities in systemd to push it into the other distributions as well.

[tinypoodle]

Giving pushd a whole new meaning   

[suare]

double-clicking? seriously now?   

Well, it's not much harder than googling is it? ;-)

[suare]

Precisely!

But with some efforts one can pretend that he've never heard of those interfaces and that nothing is documented in systemd. All it takes is some ignorance and inability to google. Landley succeeded in that endeavour - others might follow that road as well.

It doesn't change the facts though :-)

[bmarkus]

Just playing with CentOS7 and see, Red Hat moved to systemd. Wether I like it or not, I must use....

[hiro]

Oh, no worries, from Red Hat you can always expect the worse.

[bmarkus]

Oh, no worries, from Red Hat you can always expect the worse.

It is not true. RHEL is stable, reliable platform and now release 7 comes with nice features as well as finally they have recent packages, like Python 2.7.5, Apache httpd 2.4, Tomcat 7, dropped MySQL on favour of MariaDB, etc. In corporate environment usually RHEL is the only accepted LINUX platform. We are using 6.x without any issues, except, except lack of recent packages, see above. But with 7 it is gone.

CentOS now follows RHEL much faster then before as key developers are payed full time by REDHAT since January.

For me the problem now is only systemd, as setting up the system is changed and I have to relearn ho to manage the system which is wasting a time. But this is the life. Everything is changing.

[jls]

http://www.debianfork.org/

[core-user]

I think systemd is OK for big distros but it is too big in itself for using on light weight distros such as this (& others that I use/like), hopefully sense will prevail, & we will not lose the unix philosophy of small programs integrating to create a system.

[bmarkus]

I think systemd is OK for big distros but it is too big in itself for using on light weight distros such as this (& others that I use/like), hopefully sense will prevail, & we will not lose the unix philosophy of small programs integrating to create a system.

It is not about size.