diff options
author | Laurent Bercot <ska-skaware@skarnet.org> | 2014-12-19 00:54:33 +0000 |
---|---|---|
committer | Laurent Bercot <ska-skaware@skarnet.org> | 2014-12-19 00:54:33 +0000 |
commit | efb5f6b08ec1cd60451f79e6907c86a7a0319b9b (patch) | |
tree | e296c01982a1a9cc58d698f8db1082ff2ef97530 | |
parent | b42ebc38db8e44306d6353e0874810936d20fc7f (diff) | |
download | s6-efb5f6b08ec1cd60451f79e6907c86a7a0319b9b.tar.xz |
Doc update about systemd
-rw-r--r-- | doc/systemd.html | 31 |
1 files changed, 19 insertions, 12 deletions
diff --git a/doc/systemd.html b/doc/systemd.html index 49ba2aa..7b6c56a 100644 --- a/doc/systemd.html +++ b/doc/systemd.html @@ -82,23 +82,32 @@ is always a sign of developer hubris and inexperience, and never a sign of good engineering. Ever. Remember sendmail, BIND, INN, and, definitely a better analogy, the early days of Microsoft Windows ? Yes, systemd is in exactly the same league. It's as if we had learned <em>nothing</em> from the -mistakes of the past 20 years. Technically as well as politically, systemd -is actually very close to Windows; is that the future we want for Linux -machines ? +mistakes of the past 20 years. The systemd programmers may be better at +writing code than the BIND programmers - which isn't saying much - but +they are just as bad at <em>designing software</em>, and when said software +is process 1 and basically the whole low-level userland layer, it is +frightening. </p> <p> - Doing more instead of less is bad, and it's especially true in the case of + Yes, doing more instead of less is especially bad in the case of system software, i.e. low-level software that aims to make the machine work and that application software depends upon. The goal of an operating system is to make it possible to run <em>applications</em>, and system software should always partake in that goal. <strong>System software -should stay the heck out of the way</strong>, and systemd is big, loud and -obnoxious. Embedded devices are common, and will become even more common in -the future; that is a market that systemd will have trouble breaking into, because -it's a lot more complex than embedded devices need. And that, too, says something: -if a software suite is too complex for an embedded device, maybe it's just too -complex, period. +should stay the heck out of the way</strong>, which is exactly what systemd does +not. +</p> + +<p> + Technically as well as politically, systemd is actually very similar to +Microsoft Windows. If it is not fought, it is going to cause a lot of harm +to the Linux ecosystem. It has already begun. +</p> + +<p> + s6 is my humble contribution to the fight against systemd, and I am +committed to making it evolve so it becomes a real alternative. </p> <h2> Links </h2> @@ -108,8 +117,6 @@ complex, period. <li> <a href="http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/">An analysis of the vacuity of most Internet arguments about systemd</a>, by the author of <a href="http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/">uselessd</a>. </li> - <li> <a href="http://boycottsystemd.org">boycottsystemd.org</a>, summarizing -political arguments against systemd </li> <li> <a href="http://ewontfix.com/14/">Technical arguments against systemd</a>, by Rich Felker, main author of <a href="http://musl-libc.org/">musl</a> </li> <li> <a href="http://judecnelson.blogspot.fr/2014/09/systemd-biggest-fallacies.html">A |