Re: [gentoo-user] Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie

["Yuri K. Shatroff" <yks-uno@yandex.ru>]

On 22.02.2014 11:40, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
> [ ... ]
> Even as the complex beast it has become systemd is still simpler than the
> alternative of having abominations of unreliable shell scripts checking to see
> which version of grep and sed is used to split the command line, or whether
> the system uses tempfile or mktemp, or depending on perl.

Well, simpler yeah, supporting only one kernel of specific versions is 
always simpler than trying to support everything from SunOS to NetBSD. 
This way, if the kernel supported only e.g. Intel IvyBridge+ with one 
chipset family, one graphics (VESA) and so on, it would have been 
incredibly simpler.
Or probably is it systemd that checks "whether the system uses tempfile 
or mktemp"? Or having a new own (NIH) unit config format parser is 
simpler than taking one of thousands of existing ones?
It is simpler for you end user. (Though dubious for users who wield 
shell scripts and perl.) But when it comes to reliability it's entirely 
wrong. I can fix a faulty shell script without having to wait for a new 
release. Or I can even write mine own. Can you fix systemd?

> ergo libreoffice.

A follower of the MS-maintained strategy "one black box that does 
everything". I always wonder what does e.g. Excel/Calc/spreadsheed need 
font decorations for? Or 1+2 is different from *1*+/2/? ;)

> desktop environments.

A good DE design is just a collection of separate tools doing different 
things, united by some graphical design.

 > firefox.

An example of how an app once followed a non-Unix way is now failing to 
get back to the Unix way. And its reliability is somewhere near zero. 
Though, it's almost impossible now to make a simple browser which would 
also be cross-platform and popular. There's a holy bible of standards 
and quirks to support, and yet more in the development phase, for the 
end user to be happy. It's completely different from an init system, 
even all the init systems of all Unixes altogether.

 > databases.

What's wrong with them? Mostly, characteristic examples of the Unix way.

 > Heck much of
> what's being said about systemd applies to postfix - there's no general case
> reason for me to grab some random postfix component and use it for everyday
> work, therefore postfix is just some closed-source monolithic virus, right?

So now that there's a working postfix which is an example of a non-Unix 
way design, it's justified to use this approach everywhere else?


-- 
Best wishes,
Yuri K. Shatroff