Systemd BirthDate Merge: Conflicts of Interest
tboteproject.com
Systemd BirthDate Merge: Conflicts of Interest
1–10 of 25 posts
Re: Systemd BirthDate Merge: Conflicts of Interest
#2Why doesn’t someone fork systemd and start reworking/taking out all the icky parts as well as destroying Poettering’s control over it?
Debian’s forced accepting of Systemd is finally rearing it’s ugly head.
I am glad I switched to Devuan earlier this year.
Re: Systemd BirthDate Merge: Conflicts of Interest
#3The mailing list doesn't seem to make it out into such a controversial issue. It's an optional field that doesn't require a real birthday.
Re: Systemd BirthDate Merge: Conflicts of Interest
#4It was a long time coming, but it now happened. SystemD managed to do something that might give people pause over convenience factor. I am saying might, because while I am now actively planning ( until now I treated it as ideologically impure aspect of linux, but sufficiently useful to offset that discomfort ). DOB merge ( and how it was done ) changes that calculus by a wide margin. It is not even about DOB now. It is the full blown slippery slope with MS doing round 2 of EEE.
Re: Systemd BirthDate Merge: Conflicts of Interest
#5This just reads like a LLM trying to come up with a conspiracy theory around systemd.
It somehow got hyper-fixated on "three" for no particular reason and seems like it decided to harpen down that fact without explaining anything around it?
Re: Systemd BirthDate Merge: Conflicts of Interest
#6Why doesn’t someone fork systemd and start reworking/taking out all the icky parts as well as destroying Poettering’s control over it? Debian’s forced accepting of Systemd is finally rearing it’s ugly head. I am glad I switched to Devuan earlier this year.
I think.. because good inits already exist and systemD is an abomination unto god. Heavens know I was fully expecting agent integration soon...
Re: Systemd BirthDate Merge: Conflicts of Interest
#7Why doesn’t someone fork systemd and start reworking/taking out all the icky parts as well as destroying Poettering’s control over it? Debian’s forced accepting of Systemd is finally rearing it’s ugly head. I am glad I switched to Devuan earlier this year.
I think.. because good inits already exist and systemD is an abomination unto god. Heavens know I was fully expecting agent integration soon...
I agree but all the proponents of it have said “it’s so convenient who cares”. That obviously states there are some features that bring value. I’m hard pressed to believe you need ALL of systemd architected how it is for those claims to hold.
Re: Systemd BirthDate Merge: Conflicts of Interest
#8[flagged]
Re: Systemd BirthDate Merge: Conflicts of Interest
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think.. because good inits already exist and systemD is an abomination unto god. Heavens know I was fully expecting agent integration soon...
I agree but all the proponents of it have said “it’s so convenient who cares”. That obviously states there are some features that bring value. I’m hard pressed to believe you need ALL of systemd architected how it is for those claims to hold.
There is value in not having to think about stuff too much. As my buddy sometimes says: 'I work support all the time, I don't want to do it at home as well.' Hard to argue with that. Heavens know I have less time for random exploration and related troubleshooting. But.. at certain point, that convenience is nulled by.. bad ideas.
I honestly didn't decide which path ( well, distro really )I am choosing, but I know it will not contain systemd if I can help it.
Re: Systemd BirthDate Merge: Conflicts of Interest
#10The mailing list doesn't seem to make it out into such a controversial issue. It's an optional field that doesn't require a real birthday.
The issue isn’t the field but how the governance system for critical software is non-existant.