KnutBluetooth |
08-06-2011 12:33 AM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonixavier
(Post 4435035)
Project maintainers should. Some deps have made (at least at the time it was launched) XFCE 4.8 a Linux only product. Programs relying heavily on Linux only stuff like udisks make it more difficult to port software to the BSDs for example.
|
And since *BSD is still in the stone age as far as infrastructure for hardware access and management, therefore Linux users have to have the lowest common denominator of functionality so that users of other OSes don't feel left out? As a Linux user am I going to have to wait another 10 years before we are allowed to have the functionality that even Windows 95 had because we have to wait for other unices to catch up (if they're even interrested in catching up in that area to begin with)?
Besides the truth is, those deps are optional, Xfce 4.8 runs fine on *BSD/whatever without the Linux-only functionality. You just won't have the trash and a few other things that require udev and consolekit. Don't complain to the Xfce/Linux devs, complain to the *BSD devs whose priority self-evidently is the server and not the desktop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonixavier
(Post 4435035)
Now, it should make sense to have a Linux init system to basically only care about Linux, right?
|
Yes, as I explained in the previous post it makes a lot of sense because in order to work properly an init system designed for desktop use has to be closely coupled with the kernel just like udev.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonixavier
(Post 4435035)
Turns out that folks like the GNOME devs want to start making it dependent on systemd. Now, can you see how that would be a problem for people using other unices? Or are you not interested in them either?
|
Those people need to complain to the *BSD devs whose focus obviously is not the desktop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonixavier
(Post 4435035)
Technical matters aside (like inserting verbs in sentences), your attitude appears to be ideological. You happen to think systemd is a great idea. Fine. Trying to sell your fish while disregarding criticism and second thoughts as zealotry, obscurantism, fear of change, ignorance and the like is precisely what people who think they have all the answers do.
It strikes me as a bit surprising that someone who had never posted before turns a discussion into an argument and starts flaming who doesn't agree with him/her and intends to be taken seriously. I could use the same strategy you've been using, want to see?
|
It's highly annoying to have to read all sorts of falsehoods and twisting of facts about systemd.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonixavier
(Post 4435035)
The most important thing about sysvinit is that it caters to stability, reliability and standards instead of reinventing the wheel to please lazy administrators who feel maintaining it is too much work.
That's not the way to have a productive discussion, is it?
|
As I've stated two times before, sysvinit can't reliably shut down processes. There is the BSD way of doing init scripts and the System V way. And among those two ways every other UNIX-like OS and Linux-distro has different incompatible init scripts. So I wonder which standard you are refering to. It's stability is that of mountains of shell soup spaghetty code just waiting for one syntax error to bring it all crashing down.
Oh and btw, sysvinit itself is not even portable to other unices as it requires glibc.
|