Systemd 197 Brings "Quite Some Cool New Stuff"

[energyman]

question for the idiots:

if Qt is 'evil' or a 'walled garden' because of copyright assignment and if copyright assignment itself is evil - how are you even able to use linux?

gtk+? copyright assignment? you bet! gcc, bash, all gnu software - copyright assignment? Of course!

So please do the world a favor - pull your heads out of your arses and stop posting bullshit. Thank you.

And whoever thinks that systemd's desire to usurp the whole system is a good thing needs his head examined. Points to think about:
complexity
bugs
choice

[pingufunkybeat]

gtk+? copyright assignment? you bet! gcc, bash, all gnu software - copyright assignment? Of course!

You'll make his head explode.

[Ericg]

And whoever thinks that systemd's desire to usurp the whole system is a good thing needs his head examined. Points to think about:
complexity
bugs
choice

Complexity: Valid concern, partially defeated by systemd's modular nature (think Linux kernel modules.)
Bugs: Valid concern...partially defeated by modular nature.
Choice: Valid concern...partially defeated by modular nature.

Beyond core all of systemd's features are blockable via compile-time flags, even the journal. If a user is SMART enough to realize that they want to swap out a chunk of core, then they should also be smart enough to know how to compile. If they aren't then they probably shouldn't be messing around with core. I actually like the fact that systemd is bringing some continuity to the linux space.

[funkSTAR]

gtk+? copyright assignment? you bet! gcc, bash, all gnu software - copyright assignment? Of course!

So please do the world a favor - pull your heads out of your arses and stop posting bullshit. Thank you.

Here is a clue for you; gtk+ is not some CA shit like crap-Qt. So go pull your own head out of your ass. Thank you..

Oh yeah and GNU is a whole different story than the commercial piece of shit software called Qt.
http://lwn.net/Articles/529522/

[Ancurio]

Here is a clue for you; gtk+ is not some CA shit like crap-Qt. So go pull your own head out of your ass. Thank you..

Oh yeah and GNU is a whole different story than the commercial piece of shit software called Qt.
http://lwn.net/Articles/529522/

Have you ever developed anything, at all, in your life?

[TheBlackCat]

Here is a clue for you; gtk+ is not some CA shit like crap-Qt. So go pull your own head out of your ass. Thank you..

Oh yeah and GNU is a whole different story than the commercial piece of shit software called Qt.
http://lwn.net/Articles/529522/

Translation: CLA's are only acceptable for projects funkSTAR likes.

[funkSTAR]

Overall, maintenance burden was increased because a fork was inevitable. The maintenance burden was reduced for the systemd guys but increased for the community as a whole by making udev depend on systemd in a "take it or leave it" proposition, typical of walled gardens in fact. Maintenance is one thing, but intentionally breaking compatibility that people rely on is a hostile act.

In kernel land it is quite clear distro stuff must stay out of mainline because of the maintenance burden, distros ships their own patched kernels. Same goes for systemd. Following your logic Linux is a walled garden too. How stupid is that!?

[funkSTAR]

Have you ever developed anything, at all, in your life?

Yes. And refused to work on CA shit.

[funkSTAR]

Translation: CLA's are only acceptable for projects funkSTAR likes.

Please clarify which CLA crippled I like, because honestly I cant name many.

[Ericg]

In kernel land it is quite clear distro stuff must stay out of mainline because of the maintenance burden, distros ships their own patched kernels. Same goes for systemd. Following your logic Linux is a walled garden too. How stupid is that!?

He has a point. If a piece of software works one way but a small group of people need it to work another way, that has no value for the core product, then that patch should be maintained seperate from core because otherwise you get what systemd had...lots of #IFDEF's that make the code harder to read and harder to follow. Also raises compatibility concerns that direct developers of core shouldn't have to worry about.