3 ms·

> core services like evdev, the "systemd" init process, journald, and D-Bus Oh, so just most of the things that people hate about it. No biggie then. /sarcasm

> core services like evdev, the "systemd" init process, journald, and D-Bus Oh, so just most of the things that people hate about it. No biggie then. /sarcasm > People get upset because they're too lazy to run the build system themselves. People who are unwilling to run the build system and read the mailinglist are unfit to ship anything short of the whole thing anyway. In my opinion, if these people are complaining, it is meaningless. They are not the sort of people who can figure out how to fit their system into 8MB of flash on a tiny SoC, so them complaining that the systemd package is more than 10 megs is like a child complaining that their bedsheets are too barbie and not buzz lightyear enough. I can't say I've ever seen anyone complain about that. I have seen, however, people complain about broken logs, unreliable processes, butchered output, hacky fixes, obscure errors, etc. And this is the attitude that I have an issue with. Systemd has a lot of good sides, but it also has a lot of warts. Pretending that people's legitimate concerns are nonsense is a waste of everyones time, and are what makes people who have issues want to complain at every turn.

microcolonel 10y ago
> > core services like evdev, the "systemd" init process, journald, and D-Bus > Oh, so just most of the things that people hate about it. No biggie then. /sarcasm I don't know of any complete Linux system these days which doesn't ship D-Bus or udev. I think you're just complaining because you feel like it. Where are these "unreliable processes" (suspiciously vague), "butchered output" (same), "hacky fixes" (for what? your lack of capacity for logic or reason?), and "obscure errors" (but none in particular I guess) coming from?. I know about the log corruption issue reports, though as I heard it that was an issue external to journald itself (the filesystem failed); and it was ultimately possible to segment the log file, it just wasn't segmented by '\n' like a text file. That is to say, you would get the same corruption with a text file. And of course, most systems compress logs after a while, which means that filesystem-level corruption would destroy the rest of the stream. Your concerns become legitimate the moment you can point to a specific misbehaviour or confusion which cost you time or effort; short of that I'm just hearing the smack of a beggar's mouth.

microcolonel 10y ago

> > core services like evdev, the "systemd" init process, journald, and D-Bus > Oh, so just most of the things that people hate about it. No biggie then. /sarcasm I don't know of any complete Linux system these days which doesn't ship D-Bus or udev. I think you're just complaining because you feel like it. Where are these "unreliable processes" (suspiciously vague), "butchered output" (same), "hacky fixes" (for what? your lack of capacity for logic or reason?), and "obscure errors" (but none in particular I guess) coming from?. I know about the log corruption issue reports, though as I heard it that was an issue external to journald itself (the filesystem failed); and it was ultimately possible to segment the log file, it just wasn't segmented by '\n' like a text file. That is to say, you would get the same corruption with a text file. And of course, most systems compress logs after a while, which means that filesystem-level corruption would destroy the rest of the stream. Your concerns become legitimate the moment you can point to a specific misbehaviour or confusion which cost you time or effort; short of that I'm just hearing the smack of a beggar's mouth.