3 ms·

Can I ship a badly configured Linux kernel in my distro? Yes. Is that the fault of the kernel developers? No. I thought systemd is open source and if you don't

by voidr 4y ago

Can I ship a badly configured Linux kernel in my distro? Yes. Is that the fault of the kernel developers? No. I thought systemd is open source and if you don't like something about it, you can just submit a patch or even fork it or just not use it. Replacing system components is hard and the early days are going to suck. Just because there is a lot of pain and suffering with Wayland does not mean that it was a mistake and we should have just stuck with X11. Computing has changed since 1970, some things in our unix-like systems will also need to change to accommodate the current world and some of it is going to be painful, that's just how it is, we made fun of Vista, now it's our turn.

josephcsible 4y ago
> Can I ship a badly configured Linux kernel in my distro? Yes. Is that the fault of the kernel developers? No. If the default configuration were good and you changed it to be bad, that's entirely your fault. But if the default configuration were bad and you just didn't fix it, that's mostly if not entirely upstream's fault. > I thought systemd is open source and if you don't like something about it, you can just submit a patch or even fork it or just not use it. Yes, we can do that. The point is that we shouldn't have to. > Replacing system components is hard and the early days are going to suck. Nobody's complaining that things are getting replaced. We're complaining that the replacement is worse than the old thing. > Computing has changed since 1970, some things in our unix-like systems will also need to change to accommodate the current world and some of it is going to be painful, that's just how it is, we made fun of Vista, now it's our turn. Systemd didn't exist until 2010, so any changes from 1970 to 2010 clearly can't have made it necessary. And the BSDs are all still good, functional operating systems, despite not being able to run it, so it's clearly not necessary even for what's changed since 2010.

by voidr 4y ago

josephcsible 4y ago

> Can I ship a badly configured Linux kernel in my distro? Yes. Is that the fault of the kernel developers? No. If the default configuration were good and you changed it to be bad, that's entirely your fault. But if the default configuration were bad and you just didn't fix it, that's mostly if not entirely upstream's fault. > I thought systemd is open source and if you don't like something about it, you can just submit a patch or even fork it or just not use it. Yes, we can do that. The point is that we shouldn't have to. > Replacing system components is hard and the early days are going to suck. Nobody's complaining that things are getting replaced. We're complaining that the replacement is worse than the old thing. > Computing has changed since 1970, some things in our unix-like systems will also need to change to accommodate the current world and some of it is going to be painful, that's just how it is, we made fun of Vista, now it's our turn. Systemd didn't exist until 2010, so any changes from 1970 to 2010 clearly can't have made it necessary. And the BSDs are all still good, functional operating systems, despite not being able to run it, so it's clearly not necessary even for what's changed since 2010.