systemd [NOT?] (was Re: Void Linux tips)

[Michael Havens]

I just thought of a good project. Make two Linux from Scratch distos with
the only difference being one uses systemd and one does not then you can
prove or disprove whatever you want.

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:24 PM, Michael Havens <bmike1 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Linux is about choice. You can choose to run a distro with systemd or you
> can choose to run one without. You can choose to create your own linux
> implementation that does not run systemd or one that does. Everything is
> open source so you can do it if you want. Quit complaining make it do what
> you want yourself.
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 7:14 PM, Steve Litt <slitt at troubleshooters.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 22 Oct 2015 13:45:09 -0700
>> Brian Cluff <brian at snaptek.com> wrote:
>>
>> [snip Brian's ideas on systemd and its critics]
>>
>>
>> > Linux needs more distros to agree on things, not distros that do
>> > things different.
>>
>> Brian's sentence above is a statement of belief that encapsulates the
>> crux of the two years plus heated discussion about systemd. I call it a
>> belief because it's neither proven nor refuted by Newtonian Physics,
>> Relativity, Mathematical Law, etc.
>>
>> A person completely adopting this belief can follow it to one of two
>> logical conclusions (I'm skipping fairly obvious logical steps here):
>>
>> 1) Everybody should use systemd
>> 2) Nobody should use systemd
>>
>> This is an explanation for the phenomenon in which person A says "I
>> run without systemd" and person B replies, explaining why doing so is
>> wrong. If one wants a unified GNU/Linux with systemd, alternate init
>> systems, and sans-systemd distros are a threat to unified GNU/Linux.
>>
>> It can also explain why some anti-systemd people go completely
>> ballistic about systemd: Perhaps they believe in a unified GNU/Linux
>> where nobody uses systemd. However, this paragraph is complicated by
>> the fact that many people still believe that all their alternatives to
>> systemd have been removed.
>>
>> Just for the record, my belief is that I completely embrace a widely
>> heterogenous GNU/Linux. I'm glad Slackers have a distro so manual that
>> its package manager lets them manually handle dependencies. I'm glad
>> Mint people have a distro so "we do it all for you" that a five year
>> old can operate it, as long as he/she goes along with the way Mint
>> works. I have friends who use Unity, and I'm glad it makes them more
>> productive. I'm glad people who like compiling their own have Gentoo and
>> Funtoo. I'm glad that I can use ultra-simple Void to do most of my
>> work, and still run Ubuntu in a VM to handle LyX, which can't be
>> handled by Void. It's wonderful that I can use simplistic, mechanical,
>> sans-systemd Void, and give my non-Geek 22 year old triplets Lubuntu. I
>> like GNU/Linux because I can make it do almost anything, and because of
>> the wide variety of distros, I can pick the best starting point, without
>> major dis-assembly or major building up.
>>
>> Anyway, I can definitely see how differing beliefs on how homo or
>> heterogeneous GNU/Linux should be would lead to passionate debate.
>> Brian really encapsulated the entire debate in one sentence.
>>
>> SteveT
>>
>> Steve Litt
>> October 2015 featured book: Thriving in Tough Times
>> http://www.troubleshooters.com/thrive
>> ---------------------------------------------------
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss at lists.phxlinux.org
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>
>
>
>
> --
> :-)~MIKE~(-:
>



-- 
:-)~MIKE~(-:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.phxlinux.org/pipermail/plug-discuss/attachments/20151022/7ebc9230/attachment.html>