2 ms·
> Now? No, not really, just avoid GNOME. You don't have to. Someone apparently implemented the logind interface(!) so that GNOME could function on non-systemd
by lomnakkus 12y ago
> Now? No, not really, just avoid GNOME.
You don't have to. Someone apparently implemented the logind interface(!) so that GNOME could function on non-systemd systems. Just use that.
> This wouldn't be an issue if the systemd people weren't notoriously hard to get along with. [...]
Are you kidding? I've been following along the mailing list for at least two years and I've never seen any of the unreasonableness you claim. (I'm not in any way connected or invested in the systemd project, just as a little disclaimer.)
If you're going to pull this stunt please at least give us concrete references.
> Say what you want about upstart and sysvinit, but I don't recall a point where the maintainers of it were told off for hijacking kernel flags...
Ah, I see. You're just another troll recycling talking points. Oh, well.
Oh, and btw: Complain all you want -- in F/OSS the people doing the work get to decide. Deal.
- JdeBP 12y agoNo-one has yet come forward publicly with a working second implementation of logind for Linux. The only person known to be working on a second implementation of logind is targetting OpenBSD. To use logind-API-client desktop environments with the well-known systemd-shim actually involves using the logind that is part of the systemd package, running on top of a daemon that implements only part of an internal systemd API. See http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/debian-systemd-packaging-hoo-hah.html http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/de...