So ntpd and time aren't affected, but it's not FUD on any level that hearing news anything has been "added" to systemd, never has a positive ring to it.

Something new added to the Linux kernel always welcomed. Something added to Xfce, again good news. Something added to ZFS regardless of OS, again good.

...but systemd... Somehow always generates a groan and moan.

1 members found this post helpful.

Unfortunately there's a lot of ignorance on both sides of the systemd debate. The 'naysayers' don't have a monopoly on that one.

In this case Tobi is right, leaving aside any implementation quality issues, systemd's inclusion of a smtp client makes sense given their stated project goals, and has absolutely no impact on the rest of us at all.

systemd aims to be a suite of services that make it easy to set up a system from scratch without having to rely on daemons from outside the suite.
Somewhat the same thing like Busybox, but with a different focus. This is not at all about size.

1 members found this post helpful.

The problem of dealing with FUD from the pro-systemd camp is they say everything but systemd is deprecated or will be deprecated. All this focus has limited choice to even attempted elimination of choice where-as the anti-systemd camp is saying that there are choices and all this deprecation is FUD and systemd isn't the only choice.

2 members found this post helpful.

That is not at all true. Please provide examples. YOU said:

First of all, ntpd is not being implemented in systemd. "just got deprecated" - how is this not FUD? And time? Deprecated? Do you know what deprecated means? Do you know that ifconfig is actually deprecated?

And the entirety of GNU? Come on, Reaper, you don't really think this, do you? Do you have proof that they want to do this? Or is it just FUD?

First of read where I recanted my statement before you mouth off...

Then go read the websites all surrounding systemd's promotions. Unless you're 100% clueless and can't use Google, I doubt I need to say otherwise, especially where the comparison of ConsoleKit versus systemd-logind or any other part of systemd.

1 members found this post helpful.

It would be funny if they start the systemd C compiler

I can't wait for an announcement for systemd-facebookd...

1 members found this post helpful.

I don't see what's so bad or hard to follow about this ConsoleKit topic.

So you can't provide any examples then? I can't say I'm surprised.

2 members found this post helpful.

Since you find the situation easy to follow, perhaps you could tell me if the following is correct:

Lennart Poettering and Jon McCann decide they no longer wish to maintain ConsoleKit.

Rather than inviting others to adopt the project, they pass maintenance of the code to Martin Pitt (of Canonical) on the condition that he rename the project. They then declare the ConsoleKit project "dead".

They don't post their decision on the project's mailing list or otherwise contact those who've been relying upon the project. An announcement of the project being dead was eventually made (but not by the maintainers) on the Gnome mailing list, and apparently Fedora devs were notified as a notice of its demise appears in their Wiki.

No renamed fork of the project is ever announced by Canonical. The project is eventually dropped from Ubuntu, again with no invitation for others to take over maintainership.

5 members found this post helpful.

And thusly ConsoleKit joins HAL and others in the giant coffin that is still being filled with projects.

1 members found this post helpful.

These Red Hat pieces disguised as "open source projects" didn't even reach 1.0.0 and with udev they abandoned version numbers altogether and switched to build numbers. I think, the best idea is to ignore the whole Fedora-GNOME-freedesktop-CoreOS pile as the BSDs do.

1 members found this post helpful.

Well HAL is salvageable and with some patches still builds correctly. In all, HAL could be effectively revived better than other projects because HALs functionality was only replaced by ConsoleKit and other projects. If BSDs can still use HAL, why can't we?

1 members found this post helpful.

Because we'd need someone to do the job. Do you volunteer for that?

If only I knew C my good man... if only.

We have enough patches to get it buildable... But yes, it needs updates too.