On 2019-10-07 15:24, Daniel Reurich wrote:
> On 08/10/19 05:37, golinux@??? wrote:
>
> </snip>
>
>>>> One para on why systemd isn't in the spirit of free software and one
>>>> on open
>>>> source vs free software is still on my personal wish list.
>>>
>>> Here you go:
>>>
>>>     One of the unique attributes of the free software world
>>> historically has
>>>     been the modular nature of system components. There was
>>> opportunity for
>>>     anyone with an interest in doing so to write a replacement for a
>>>     component, and if the software they wrote was reliable and
>>> presented novel
>>>     features, it might become the preferred solution for that
>>> particular task.
>>>     The end result of this was that a wide variety of code from a
>>> large,
>>>     diverse group of free software developers saw use in many
>>> systems,
>>> giving
>>>     free software users a choice in what software they used. Because
>>> of this,
>>>     we have a number of excellent free software solutions to serve
>>> almost
>>>     every function - mailers of various sorts, loggers, web servers,
>>> process
>>>     monitors, domain name system software, with the list going on
>>> nearly
>>>     indefinitely, and this flexibility and suitability has made free
>>> software
>>>     the preferred platform for writing and running software services
>>> of all
>>>     types.
>>>
>>>     One of the issues with systemd is that, contrary to the Unix
>>> philosophy of
>>>    "do one thing and do it well", systemd seeks to do all things, and
>>> to
>>>     explicitly crowd out other software by offering
>>> tightly-integrated
>>> modules
>>>     that are heavily dependent upon one another. As operating systems
>>>     integrate systemd, the temptation exists to run more and more
>>> systemd
>>>     code, with each piece being difficult to replace individually
>>> given
>>>     systemd's lack of interest in portability or standards
>>> compliance.
>>> Systemd
>>>     seeks to define a new, defacto standard, controlled by the
>>> relatively
>>>     small and isolated group of systemd developers, rather than
>>> adhering to
>>>     portable, proven, multi-vendor POSIX standards, honed through
>>> decades of
>>>     experience running complex, critical, real-world computer
>>> systems.
>>>
>>> Note: I'm fond of my commas and would prefer that if this is used, it
>>> remain
>>> largely intact.
>>>
>>
>> Oh, my . . .  That is way too wordy and out of character with the rest
>> of the very friendly and accessible free software page.  File this
>> under
>> "be careful what you wish for".  LOL!!!  Sorry for your trouble.
>>
> Actually, I thought it to be a rather nicely rounded explanation that
> would be useful for explaining the broad reason why systemd is
> anti-thetical to free software. We should use it...
>
> Dan
>

Only with a cooperative rewrite but I sense a hostility to doing so
since I have been requested to use it "largely intact". Context is
important. It is stylistically too heavy and verbose for the rest of the
page IMO. I may try a rewrite after I finish preparing the iso-docs but
don't want to waste my time any more than mason wants to waste his.

golinux