3 ms·

So what are you arguing? Because I see a list of disparate platforms sharing the same init system, and I see the homogeneity that is systemd/linux. What is that

by tal8d 6y ago

So what are you arguing? Because I see a list of disparate platforms sharing the same init system, and I see the homogeneity that is systemd/linux. What is that a counterpoint to? Or is this a celebration of network effect? > POSIX isn't enough for a modern operating system. So there should be no standard? I can think of only one time I ran into a shortcoming that can be blamed on POSIX, and a few more where the OS just did a bad job in implementing the standard. Can you imagine how awful things would be right now if the DoD hadn't forced the concepts of interface commonality and multi-source procurement? You'd likely be reading this on a Honeywell glass TTY hooked up to an IBM timeshare. Because without standards the network effect acts as an insurmountable barrier to entry, and incumbents fully control the height of that barrier with needless complexity and arbitrary breaking changes. Hell, not that long ago there was talk about wielding GPL export symbols as a weapon to punish nvidia... I'm no fan of nvidia, but I like the idea of an API inspired by spite a lot less. Also, in a world where your vision prevailed, there would be no AMD - because Intel already set the industry "standard", so why worry about second-source availability?

oblio 6y ago
> Because I see a list of disparate platforms sharing the same init system Which one? I just listed the others and they all use different init systems... > So there should be no standard No, they should turn systemd into a real standard. ECMAinitd :-p
- tal8d 6y ago
  Are you intentionally missing that the point is the fact that any one of them can use the portable init system that isn't systemd? > No, they should turn systemd into a real standard. ECMAinitd :-p Well systemd can only work on linux, by design. So every standard compliant init system would require that it package a linux kernel. That is not only moronic, but with history as our guide: would directly result in never patched, network active, embedded software.

by tal8d 6y ago

oblio 6y ago

> Because I see a list of disparate platforms sharing the same init system Which one? I just listed the others and they all use different init systems... > So there should be no standard No, they should turn systemd into a real standard. ECMAinitd :-p

tal8d 6y ago
Are you intentionally missing that the point is the fact that any one of them can use the portable init system that isn't systemd? > No, they should turn systemd into a real standard. ECMAinitd :-p Well systemd can only work on linux, by design. So every standard compliant init system would require that it package a linux kernel. That is not only moronic, but with history as our guide: would directly result in never patched, network active, embedded software.