3 ms·

How can he possibly be trolling? He's pointing out that the existing systems work fine and have for years, and that's the full extent of his post. This is why p

How can he possibly be trolling? He's pointing out that the existing systems work fine and have for years, and that's the full extent of his post. This is why people hate systemd: the hordes of people who do personal attacks on anyone who even disagrees with them. You're doing it right here: anyone who disagrees with you is a troll.

acdha 12y ago
> He's pointing out that the existing systems work fine and have for years, and that's the full extent of his post That was my point: there are well-known limitations to those systems which are the stated reasons for developing systemd in the first place. It's reasonable to disagree about the priorities or the approach which systemd uses but instead pekk instead just pretended that there aren't any unsolved problems. > You're doing it right here: anyone who disagrees with you is a troll Here, try filling in the blanks: “[ ] is hard to do with SysV init. I don't like the way systemd does [ ] because [] and prefer the way [] does [] instead" See the difference?
- FeeTinesAMady 12y ago
  Just because those are the stated reasons for developing systemd, that doesn't mean that those are the actual reasons, nor does it mean that other init systems don't work (even though they could be improved - into, say, OpenRC). And that definitely doesn't imply that the poster was a troll. You didn't even address that. That is a personal attack, and is typical of how systemd supporters shout down the opposition. > Here, try filling in the blanks: “[ ] is hard to do with SysV init. I don't like the way systemd does [ ] because [] and prefer the way [] does [] instead" > See the difference? So anyone who criticizes systemd and doesn't fill in those blanks is a troll?
- the_solution 12y ago
  The unresolved problems of SysV don't automatically make the systemd approach right either.

acdha 12y ago

> He's pointing out that the existing systems work fine and have for years, and that's the full extent of his post That was my point: there are well-known limitations to those systems which are the stated reasons for developing systemd in the first place. It's reasonable to disagree about the priorities or the approach which systemd uses but instead pekk instead just pretended that there aren't any unsolved problems. > You're doing it right here: anyone who disagrees with you is a troll Here, try filling in the blanks: “[ ] is hard to do with SysV init. I don't like the way systemd does [ ] because [] and prefer the way [] does [] instead" See the difference?

FeeTinesAMady 12y ago
Just because those are the stated reasons for developing systemd, that doesn't mean that those are the actual reasons, nor does it mean that other init systems don't work (even though they could be improved - into, say, OpenRC). And that definitely doesn't imply that the poster was a troll. You didn't even address that. That is a personal attack, and is typical of how systemd supporters shout down the opposition. > Here, try filling in the blanks: “[ ] is hard to do with SysV init. I don't like the way systemd does [ ] because [] and prefer the way [] does [] instead" > See the difference? So anyone who criticizes systemd and doesn't fill in those blanks is a troll?
the_solution 12y ago
The unresolved problems of SysV don't automatically make the systemd approach right either.