Interesting that you should cite Stallman because freedom is an issue here, we've been reduced to Microsoft when it comes to init. We've lost most of our flexibility with no option to choose piecemeal what we want and don't want. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew Holway" <andrew.holway at gmail.com> To: "centos" <centos at centos.org> Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2017 9:50:02 AM Subject: Re: [CentOS] OT: systemd Poll> > I'd much rather have a bash script to look at-- and manually step through.Is that a joke? Bash is an almighty impenetrable nightmare. I've been doing *nix for nearly 10 years and *still* am unable to read anything vaguely complicated in bash whereas I can write fairly decent python after 6 months. From my point of view SystemD is amazing I can write a 6 line service file for my apps and it *just works* and I don't have to think about it anymore. What is it about SystemD that brings out the Richard Stallman in everyone? _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS at centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 04/11/2017 09:48 AM, Leroy Tennison wrote:> Interesting that you should cite Stallman because freedom is an issue here, we've been reduced to Microsoft when it comes to init. We've lost most of our flexibility with no option to choose piecemeal what we want and don't want.You also don't have the flexibility to replace the kernel. Or glibc. Does anyone here remember Red Hat 5, when libc5 was replaced with glibc? The noise about systemd seems *awfully* familiar.
On 2017-04-11, Gordon Messmer <gordon.messmer at gmail.com> wrote:> > You also don't have the flexibility to replace the kernel. Or glibc.But you do, don't you? It'll take you months to replace them, or years to rewrite, but you *can* do it. That is the freedom that open source software provides that proprietary OSes do not; it does not come with the additional promise to provide exactly the software you specify. --keith -- kkeller at wombat.san-francisco.ca.us