On Wed, 2015-02-25 at 13:11 -0800, Go Linux wrote:
> This excellent analysis of the systemd debacle was just posted over on FDN. Should be required reading IMO. Enjoy!
>
> http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=120652&p=570371
>
> golinux
>
I must respectfully disagree. I find the analysis to be very biased
toward one side of the discussion, as well as creating their own
definitions to fit their side.

If something replaces init, it is by definition "an init system".
Whether it does more or less than the previous init is immaterial to
that simple fact.

What I find interesting about the whole affair is that for all the
arguments for and against systemd, no one seems to really bring out the
one argument that really makes a difference. All of Unix follows POSIX
in some major measure. The init system is not covered by the POSIX
standard.

There have been other replacements for init in the past. The fact that
Linux is going through this particular "growing pain" that other Unixes
already have is nothing new and certainly not the end of the world.

Devuan is proof of that diversity can exist and should. So is Gentoo
and some others out there.

If I had to point the finger at Linux's greatest failing, it is the
expectation that users want others to do all of the work compiling and
packaging and then they want to complain that that someone else made a
choice that they didn't like.

I consider it tantamount to childish whining. The code is there. If you
don't like it, fix it. That's one reason why I like Devuan. Devuan
doesn't just talk, Devuan does something about it.

T.J.