Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 86

Thread: Systemd 197 Brings "Quite Some Cool New Stuff"

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,718

    Default

    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

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,926

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by energyman View Post
    gtk+? copyright assignment? you bet! gcc, bash, all gnu software - copyright assignment? Of course!
    You'll make his head explode.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,860

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by energyman View Post
    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.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by energyman View Post
    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/

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    502

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    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?

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,066

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    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.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    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!?

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ancurio View Post
    Have you ever developed anything, at all, in your life?
    Yes. And refused to work on CA shit.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheBlackCat View Post
    Translation: CLA's are only acceptable for projects funkSTAR likes.
    Please clarify which CLA crippled I like, because honestly I cant name many.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,860

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    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.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •