Re: Good article on systemd
On 09/30/2016 01:47 PM, Rex Dieter wrote:
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> ... This type of an intentional blind spot is quite typical,
> inside the systemd reality distortion field.
Comments like that are neither considerate or respectful, and are not
welcome in the fedora community.
https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct
I encourage any moderators to take note, and close the thread if necessary.
Rex, the last time everybody agreed on things was in the late 1930's in
Germany, and that really didn't turn out all that well now, did it?
We need some place to vent our frustrations since no one seems to
listen to those of us who actually USE the system and try to get some
real work done rather than treating it as an experiment. After all,
eventually Fedora becomes RHEL (and CentOS), so this isn't trivial
stuff! It affects what will we will be using for years.
In my opinion and speaking as a system administrator and programmer
with over 45 years of experience (as well as having served on four
highly contentious ANSI committees), systemd is overly complicated,
burdensome and just plain broken in many areas. It never should have
been adopted in its current state. It isn't "baked" enough.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital ricks(a)alldigital.com -
- AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 -
- -
- A day for firm decisions!!! Well, then again, maybe not! -
----------------------------------------------------------------------