[PLUG] systemd

benjamin barber starworks5 at gmail.com
Sat Nov 28 20:27:51 UTC 2015


This is filled with platitudes, but doesn't address any of the
substantitive questions.

For example, is it wise to have an init system also control su as well as
DHCPd. ?

also, are we transitioning from gnu-linux to lennartix by ditching the unix
philosophy ?

quite frankly this seems like the typical practice of embrace - extend -
extinguish.

On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Keith Lofstrom <keithl at gate.kl-ic.com>
wrote:

> Like many recent linux changes, systemd solves a lot of problems
> compared to the kluges that it replaces, but it was not deployed
> with other people and existing infrastructure in mind.  So, the
> burden of adapting to such changes is foisted on the rest of us.
>
> While glittery shiny first impressions are nice, pain rules
> our long term reaction to new things.  A distro that is easy
> 90% of the time and ridiculously difficult 10% of the time is
> less likely to endure than something that is 30% easy and 1%
> difficult.  Change is never easy, and migration is difficult.
>
> For me, a computer is a structure that I embellish with my own
> data, procedures, adaptions, and improvements.  Changing the
> structure means I must translate all of that, without help.
>
> It's like replacing the wooden beams of my house with carbon
> fiber.  That might help in an earthquake, but the cost of
> the transition would be more devastating than an earthquake.
> Instead, I added kludges and retrofits to achieve the same
> earthquake protection.  Build new houses with carbon fiber if
> you wish, but don't abandon the installed base that is better
> improved than replaced.  If you must change house structure,
> make your carbon fiber install cheap and painless.
>
> We invest in our computers, and change invalidates many of our
> investments.  If those who wish to impose these changes had
> to pay the full cost of their decisions, and help us recoup
> our lost investments, they would make different decisions,
> and provide tools that facilitate change and adaption.
>
> This is an opportunity hiding in a problem, for sane profit-
> seeking entrepreneurs (if there are any left in our community).
> Focusing on the needs of humans, rather than the needs of the
> machines.  Modelling change against the entire installed base,
> instead of a couple dozen configurations favored by developers.
>
> At a guess, linux designed for low cost mass deployment and long
> term stability might make new development five times harder for
> developers, almost cost-free for customers, and thus 100x cheaper
> overall, assuming millions of customers willing to pay a little
> something to avoid pain.  For those of us ready to graduate from
> "gratis" Linux to "least total cost" Linux, a new distro to fill
> the role that Redhat used to fill (stodgy but predictable) would
> be welcomed, and could be very profitable.
>
> Keith
>
> --
> Keith Lofstrom          keithl at keithl.com
> _______________________________________________
> PLUG mailing list
> PLUG at lists.pdxlinux.org
> http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
>



More information about the PLUG mailing list