4 ms·

I think systemd critique is misguided. The real problem is Linux. A lot of things in Linux is either bad or ancient. People are building these solutions: PulseA

I think systemd critique is misguided. The real problem is Linux. A lot of things in Linux is either bad or ancient. People are building these solutions: PulseAudio, systemd, NetworkManager, libuv, Xorg, SELinux, OpenSSH because they are forced to do so. It not like Red Hat sponsor a systemd from pure goodwill and love to mankind. Since it is politically incorrect to criticize Linux, people attack projects that try make a positive change...

pmoriarty 9y ago
There are sane replacements for SysV Init, like runit.[1] None of these other init replacements try to absorb the functionality of a ton of other core services like sysstemd does either, so they're a lot easier to swallow. You'll notice there was no holy war against upstart or OpenRC, for instance. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runit
mdekkers 9y ago
People are building these solutions: PulseAudio, systemd, NetworkManager, libuv, Xorg, SELinux, OpenSSH because they are forced to do so. How old are you? OpenSSH wasn't built because there was something wrong with Linux per-se, in fact it came out of BSD due to a licensing issue with SSH. SSH was a replacement for the rlogin/telnet type toolsuites due to them being ridiculously insecure. Nothing to do with Linux. Xorg was released, again as mostly a licensing issue (although some architectural improvements) based on XFree86, which was first released in 1991, with UNIX type systems in mind. This fully working windowing system was released around the same time Linus released the first fledgling version of his kernel. XFree86 was an implementation of X, which was around way before Linux was around. > The real problem is Linux I lack the words or intellect to refute such a well-founded and self-evident statement.
- Chyzwar 9y ago
  OpenSSH was ported from BSB because there was no alternative in Linux. If not for GNU available for Linus, we would have now flame wars Red Hat vs Canonical coreutils. X was fine 20 years ago as a prototype. In the meantime, we could have Linux Foundation to create a modern alternative. Instead, we have two competing solutions MIR and Wayland that still do not work very well. The reason we have such clusterfuck of incompatible distributions is that Linux is one man show. Instead of bringing industry toghether, Linus is doing his own thing. In meantime distributions instead trying to create useful userspace software are repackaging, porting and competing on init systems.... Next pointless war on the horizon snap vs flatpak.
  - mdekkers 9y ago
    pretty much all your assertions are factually incorrect, and show a significant immaturity on your part regarding your work experience in this ecosystem. This might help: http://www.google.com http://www.google.com OpenSSH was ported from BSB because there was no alternative in Linux The original version of SSH was available for Linux, before OSSH or OpenSSH where developed. X was fine 20 years ago as a prototype Chortle. X stopped being a prototype around 1985/1986 and has powered more systems then I bet you had hot meals and changes of underwear. The reason we have such clusterfuck of incompatible distributions is that Linux is one man show. Instead of bringing industry toghether, Linus is doing his own thing Now you are just trolling.
    - Chyzwar 9y ago
      SSH Orginal version became proprietary and was forked by BSD developers. Later portable version was created for Linux and other operating systems. You have now situation critical protocol and implementation is maintained by OpenBSD Foundation. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Shell#History_and_development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Shell#History_and_devel... X was not intended for the desktop. It was used as a prototype because there was nothing better. We are stuck with an ancient client-server architecture that cannot properly display video playback inside the browser. I respect your opinion, but you just ignore anything in your holy temple of Linux.

pmoriarty 9y ago

There are sane replacements for SysV Init, like runit.[1] None of these other init replacements try to absorb the functionality of a ton of other core services like sysstemd does either, so they're a lot easier to swallow. You'll notice there was no holy war against upstart or OpenRC, for instance. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runit

mdekkers 9y ago

People are building these solutions: PulseAudio, systemd, NetworkManager, libuv, Xorg, SELinux, OpenSSH because they are forced to do so. How old are you? OpenSSH wasn't built because there was something wrong with Linux per-se, in fact it came out of BSD due to a licensing issue with SSH. SSH was a replacement for the rlogin/telnet type toolsuites due to them being ridiculously insecure. Nothing to do with Linux. Xorg was released, again as mostly a licensing issue (although some architectural improvements) based on XFree86, which was first released in 1991, with UNIX type systems in mind. This fully working windowing system was released around the same time Linus released the first fledgling version of his kernel. XFree86 was an implementation of X, which was around way before Linux was around. > The real problem is Linux I lack the words or intellect to refute such a well-founded and self-evident statement.

Chyzwar 9y ago
OpenSSH was ported from BSB because there was no alternative in Linux. If not for GNU available for Linus, we would have now flame wars Red Hat vs Canonical coreutils. X was fine 20 years ago as a prototype. In the meantime, we could have Linux Foundation to create a modern alternative. Instead, we have two competing solutions MIR and Wayland that still do not work very well. The reason we have such clusterfuck of incompatible distributions is that Linux is one man show. Instead of bringing industry toghether, Linus is doing his own thing. In meantime distributions instead trying to create useful userspace software are repackaging, porting and competing on init systems.... Next pointless war on the horizon snap vs flatpak.
- mdekkers 9y ago
  pretty much all your assertions are factually incorrect, and show a significant immaturity on your part regarding your work experience in this ecosystem. This might help: http://www.google.com http://www.google.com OpenSSH was ported from BSB because there was no alternative in Linux The original version of SSH was available for Linux, before OSSH or OpenSSH where developed. X was fine 20 years ago as a prototype Chortle. X stopped being a prototype around 1985/1986 and has powered more systems then I bet you had hot meals and changes of underwear. The reason we have such clusterfuck of incompatible distributions is that Linux is one man show. Instead of bringing industry toghether, Linus is doing his own thing Now you are just trolling.
  - Chyzwar 9y ago
    SSH Orginal version became proprietary and was forked by BSD developers. Later portable version was created for Linux and other operating systems. You have now situation critical protocol and implementation is maintained by OpenBSD Foundation. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Shell#History_and_development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Shell#History_and_devel... X was not intended for the desktop. It was used as a prototype because there was nothing better. We are stuck with an ancient client-server architecture that cannot properly display video playback inside the browser. I respect your opinion, but you just ignore anything in your holy temple of Linux.