Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 16 submissions in the queue.
posted by LaminatorX on Friday September 19 2014, @05:47AM   Printer-friendly
from the voice-from-on-high dept.

Systemd has turned into the Godzilla of Linux controversies. "Everywhere you look it's stomping through blogs, rampaging through online discussion threads, and causing white-hot flames that resemble Godzilla's own breath of death," writes Jim Lynch. Now Sam Varghese reports at iTWire that although Linus Torvalds is well-known for his strong opinions, when it comes to systemd, Torvalds is neutral. "When it comes to systemd, you may expect me to have lots of colorful opinions, and I just don't," says Torvalds. "I don't personally mind systemd, and in fact my main desktop and laptop both run it."

Oh, there's been bitter fights before. Just think about the emacs vs vi wars. Or, closer to systemd, the whole "SysV init" vs "BSD init" differences certainly ended up being things that people had "heated discussions" about. Or think about the desktop comparisons.

I'm not really sure how different the systemd brawls are from those. It's technical, but admittedly the systemd developers have also been really good at alienating people on a purely personal level too. Not that that is anything particularly new under the sun _either_: the (very) bitter wars between the GPL and the BSD license camps during late-80s and early-90s were almost certainly more about the persons involved and how they pissed off people than necessarily deeply about other differences (which existed, obviously, but still).

Torvalds was asked if systemd didn't create a single point of failure which makes a system unbootable if it fails. "I think people are digging for excuses. I mean, if that is a reason to not use a piece of software, then you shouldn't use the kernel either."

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Geotti on Friday September 19 2014, @09:14AM

    by Geotti (1146) on Friday September 19 2014, @09:14AM (#95404) Journal

    We could use a microkernel too.

    Well, then you'll be happy to know that Minix 3.3 was recently released [].

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by tibman on Friday September 19 2014, @02:20PM

    by tibman (134) Subscriber Badge on Friday September 19 2014, @02:20PM (#95495)

    Small world, i was reading up on Minux last night. Was thinking about attempting a retro-computer and exploring OS options.

    SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
  • (Score: 2) by mtrycz on Friday September 19 2014, @09:29AM

    by mtrycz (60) on Friday September 19 2014, @09:29AM (#95407)

    Yeah, I never got around to trying that one out. Thanks.

    Does it work?

    In capitalist America, ads view YOU!
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by Geotti on Friday September 19 2014, @09:54AM

    by Geotti (1146) on Friday September 19 2014, @09:54AM (#95413) Journal

    Haven't tried it myself, but supposedly Minix is (much) more than just an/for academic exercise.

    It runs on x86 and ARM CPUs, is compatible with NetBSD, and runs thousands of NetBSD packages.

    It was only with the third version, MINIX 3, and the third edition of the book, published in 2006, that the emphasis changed from teaching to a serious research and production system, especially for embedded systems. []