4 ms·

Process persistence is not an issue, it's a feature. "Desktop" users with their silly "issues" should go somewhere else and leave Unix alone.

• matthewmacleod 10y ago
  "Desktop" users with their silly "issues" should go somewhere else and live Unix alone. Were you unintentionally playing a parody of a traditionalist here? I can't really say I have much of an opinion on systemd, aside from using it on newer systems and discovering that it hasn't really affected much. But it does seem that there's an unnecessary amount of antipathy between views on this issue, to the point where any discussion about it is difficult to extract any value from due to the noise. This comment kind of sums that up - issues of desktop users are important for desktop users of UNIX, and dismissing that seems a little irrational.
  • sklogic 10y ago
    Do we even need those low quality, low value "desktop" users? Why should everyone else suffer in order to make things tiny bit easier for an average Joe? Systemd is ill-designed throughout, and all of its design decisions do not have any place in Unix world. They're solving the silly desktop "issues" (note the quotes again - I do not believe any of this is a genuine issue at all) always in the most retarded and convoluted way possible.
    • matthewmacleod 10y ago
      I think you're maybe overreacting. It's worth considering that far from being targeted only at desktops, systemd seems to be pretty useful in server installs – the CoreOS ecosystem is a good example of where it works well. I do get the impression that systemd isn't particularly well-designed, in that it feels like it would be equally possible to implement a more modular solution with better-defined and -designed APIs, such that the problems it solves could be handled collaboratively across the whole UNIX platform. I get the impression that this would make many people happier. I do reject your characterisation problems as 'silly desktop issues' however – and it's shallow arguments like that, rather than genuine objections to the implementation of systemd that make the discussion so unconstructive.
      • sklogic 10y ago
        Gnome not cleaning up after itself is a silly issue indeed. And especially not worthy of modifying a 40 years old policy, with suggestions like this making it even more silly and more non-issue. A far more reasonable remedy to such a problem would have been to stop using Gnome, KDE and all the similar crap once and for all.
  • mjolk 10y ago
    It's an environmental concern. An oil spill causes harm to the ecosystem, and if the response to it isn't correct, the damage can spread or future parties won't be particularly careful.
    • matthewmacleod 10y ago
      I'm not really sure I get your analogy. Oil spills are bad, so we should shout about how awful it is to have an economy dependent on it?
      • mjolk 10y ago
        Sorry, probably not the most fitting analogy. And I think I might have attached my reply to the wrong parent comment. What I was trying to express was that if tmux had changed itself to accommodate systemd, this would have negatively affected the Linux "environment" by making it more acceptable for breaking changes in underpinnings to occur. By future parties not being particularly careful, I meant that this could easily lead to "screen, tmux, and pulseaudio agreed to run as a systemd delegate, and we already wrote the code expecting that you would, so we see this as your bug, not ours." This is particularly concerning as a behavior because RedHat has the money to buy its way.