3 ms·

There are almost as many glaring deficiencies and errors in that one as there are in the headlined page here. Just two out of the many problems that are simila

by JdeBP 9y ago

There are almost as many glaring deficiencies and errors in that one as there are in the headlined page here. Just two out of the many problems that are similar: * In one of the several systemd errors, it describes "system" and "package-related" service directories for FreeBSD; and "user, "system", and "package" service directories for SmartOS; but states that all unit files are stored in the /etc/system tree for the systemd operating systems. * A whole bunch of stuff in the Ubuntu column is around 11 years out of date. Ubuntu switched from /etc/init.d/ to /etc/init/ in 2006, for example. And it has switched from that since then. "Updated for 2017" that page most definitely is not.

nailer 9y ago
Thanks for your feedback. Both issues you mentioned - the missing 'd' in '/etc/systemd' and Ubuntu being updated for systemd (and me forgetting that Ubuntu's old SysVInit was different than Red Hat's) are now fixed. If there's anything else wrong, just edit: https://github.com/certsimple/rosetta-stone/blob/master/rosetta-stone.md https://github.com/certsimple/rosetta-stone/blob/master/rose... The doc was made from scratch last year with a massive amount of original research. SmartOS and OpenBSD folks have already contributed. Saying its 'almost as many glaring deficiencies and errors' is wrong.
- JdeBP 9y ago
  On the contrary, it is alas very right. The problem appears to be that you do not see these many glaring deficiencies and errors. Two examples are right here. I pointed at the glaringly deficient systemd operating systems' columns, as compared to the FreeBSD and SmartOS columns, and you did not even see that, and simply changed a directory name. It's glaring because it's basic stuff that is right at the top of the systemd.unit manual page and in most of the introductions to systemd that one can find, as well as being one of the concepts that the systemd people tout about systemd. I mentioned that Ubuntu switched to /etc/init and you talked about "Ubuntu's old SysVInit" and did not see a glaring error. Ubuntu stopped using van Smoorenburg rc, as I said, in 2006. Ubuntu's /etc/init for roughly a decade from 2006 onwards is not "SysV" anything. Similarly, the OpenBSD column is glaringly erroneous as one can see by simply comparing it against the very page that its entries hyperlink to. The actual OpenBSD page does not say any such thing, and if this work began last year there was not the excuse that it began before OpenBSD worked the way that it now does. OpenBSD has worked this way since 2015. Again, "Updated for 2017" that page most definitely is not. Incidentally, it comes up as a completely blank page without JavaScript. Bruce Hamilton's page headlined here has the distinct advantage of not requiring a more than 30-thousand-line 2.1MiB JavaScript program running on every reader's WWW browser merely in order to have some HTML text in an HTML table. The HTML text in the HTML table just works, even when there is no JavaScript. And in the time since I wrote the first message it has started coming up as a blank page with JavaScript. Google Chrome tells me that you have a syntax error buried somewhere in the middle of a 527-character-long opaque single line of those megabinarybytes of JavaScript. Uncaught SyntaxError: missing ) after argument list
  - nailer 9y ago
    > Ubuntu's /etc/init for roughly a decade from 2006 onwards is not "SysV" anything. Yes but nobody has ever used Ubuntu's init as upstart. It was always used via SysVInit compatibility and documented even by Ubuntu as such. This explains why Ubuntu finally dropped Upstart. > Similarly, the OpenBSD column is glaringly erroneous as one can see by simply comparing it against the very page that its entries hyperlink to. The actual OpenBSD page does not say any such thing Which? Every single OpenBSD entry is wrong? Are you completely sure about that, or are you using hyperbole as an excuse not to contribute? > it comes up as a completely blank page without JavaScript. Yes. JS is required for behavior. That's what JS does.

by JdeBP 9y ago

nailer 9y ago

Thanks for your feedback. Both issues you mentioned - the missing 'd' in '/etc/systemd' and Ubuntu being updated for systemd (and me forgetting that Ubuntu's old SysVInit was different than Red Hat's) are now fixed. If there's anything else wrong, just edit: https://github.com/certsimple/rosetta-stone/blob/master/rosetta-stone.md https://github.com/certsimple/rosetta-stone/blob/master/rose... The doc was made from scratch last year with a massive amount of original research. SmartOS and OpenBSD folks have already contributed. Saying its 'almost as many glaring deficiencies and errors' is wrong.

JdeBP 9y ago
On the contrary, it is alas very right. The problem appears to be that you do not see these many glaring deficiencies and errors. Two examples are right here. I pointed at the glaringly deficient systemd operating systems' columns, as compared to the FreeBSD and SmartOS columns, and you did not even see that, and simply changed a directory name. It's glaring because it's basic stuff that is right at the top of the systemd.unit manual page and in most of the introductions to systemd that one can find, as well as being one of the concepts that the systemd people tout about systemd. I mentioned that Ubuntu switched to /etc/init and you talked about "Ubuntu's old SysVInit" and did not see a glaring error. Ubuntu stopped using van Smoorenburg rc, as I said, in 2006. Ubuntu's /etc/init for roughly a decade from 2006 onwards is not "SysV" anything. Similarly, the OpenBSD column is glaringly erroneous as one can see by simply comparing it against the very page that its entries hyperlink to. The actual OpenBSD page does not say any such thing, and if this work began last year there was not the excuse that it began before OpenBSD worked the way that it now does. OpenBSD has worked this way since 2015. Again, "Updated for 2017" that page most definitely is not. Incidentally, it comes up as a completely blank page without JavaScript. Bruce Hamilton's page headlined here has the distinct advantage of not requiring a more than 30-thousand-line 2.1MiB JavaScript program running on every reader's WWW browser merely in order to have some HTML text in an HTML table. The HTML text in the HTML table just works, even when there is no JavaScript. And in the time since I wrote the first message it has started coming up as a blank page with JavaScript. Google Chrome tells me that you have a syntax error buried somewhere in the middle of a 527-character-long opaque single line of those megabinarybytes of JavaScript. Uncaught SyntaxError: missing ) after argument list
- nailer 9y ago
  > Ubuntu's /etc/init for roughly a decade from 2006 onwards is not "SysV" anything. Yes but nobody has ever used Ubuntu's init as upstart. It was always used via SysVInit compatibility and documented even by Ubuntu as such. This explains why Ubuntu finally dropped Upstart. > Similarly, the OpenBSD column is glaringly erroneous as one can see by simply comparing it against the very page that its entries hyperlink to. The actual OpenBSD page does not say any such thing Which? Every single OpenBSD entry is wrong? Are you completely sure about that, or are you using hyperbole as an excuse not to contribute? > it comes up as a completely blank page without JavaScript. Yes. JS is required for behavior. That's what JS does.