3 ms·
It's another example of invalidating an old convention for no good reason. And the entirety of systemd is an overly complex mess that does a lot of this. It tr
by qwertyuiop924 10y ago
It's another example of invalidating an old convention for no good reason.
And the entirety of systemd is an overly complex mess that does a lot of this. It tries to replace cron. It tries to replace automounters. It tries to replace inetd. It will try to replace dbus, with the aid of the kernel. It replaces everything for no good reason, and that which it doesn't replace, it consumes.
Do one thing well, work together, and handle text streams? More like do everything meh, work alone, and handle binary formats known only to you.
- serge2k 10y agoSo this article has nothing to with systemd.
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago...Aside from the fact that the article is about the attitude amongst devs that manifested itself both as the motd-framework and as systemd, making this article thourougly linked to systemd, yes.
- prodigal_erik 10y agoThe problem is bad taste about how responsibility and customization should be divided between discrete components, and how the boundaries should be managed over time. systemd is merely another symptom.
- qwertyuiop924 10y agoWhich is what I said in my original post.