Jump to content
Read the Funtoo Newsletter: Summer 2023 ×


Recommended Posts

UHmm ... 'forced' to maintain init scripts?  Dude.  Hate to tell you this, but this is UNIX, not Windows.  If you develop a Unix service, you can write the init script or let the admin do it, but this has been a standard for ... 40 years?  Thats like saying a Windows developer is "foced" to have an installer program.


A shell-less boot?  I hate to tell you this, but a shell is part of UNIX.  I need a shell no matter what.  I don't need DBUS.  A UNIX shell is a requirement of a UNIX system.  You are adding requirements, not taking them away.


Linux = Linus + Unix


Just proof that systemd mongers are trying to take the Unix (and the FREEDOM of Unix - I LIKE to modify my scripts, thank you) out of my Linux box and replace it with a bunch of junk.  I was really trying to give the systemd crowd the benefit of the doubt, but you went off the deep-end with the worst arguments I've ever heard.


You are definately troll-bait!  Adding to my block-list

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think nrc's original post in reply to OP should be the last word...

There are plenty of distros that support systemd.  I believe that it's important that someone is doing the work to make a Linux distro that works without systemd.   The developers are tackling a complicated problem with upstream projects that are not always supportive (one might even say they're hostile) to their goal.   Unless the goal is to attract more users for the sake of having more users it makes no sense to compromise that effort by splitting the userbase and the development effort between installs with and without systemd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...