SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
elias writes:
"A very public and sometimes acrimonious dispute in the Debian ecosystem about upstart versus systemd has been settled in favour of systemd. Some go as far as to brand it a new era after the Linux civil war [Beware popups].
We also had an asksoylentnews question on what the fuzz was all about. But what can upstart contribute to systemd now the war is over, or will it simply be a technology that we remember fondly, but do not see any more in a few years time?"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Ubuntu Concedes Defeat in Upstart vs Systemd
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 41 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
I think we are in Rats' Alley where the dead men lost their bones.
-- T.S. Eliot
(Score: 2, Interesting) by caseih on Wednesday March 19 2014, @03:38PM
I find your criticisms of Epoch a bit strange, honestly. I don't see how Epoch does not follow the section, "So how should init be done right." Have you downloaded Epoch and looked at the source code before making this criticism?
The blog post you link to is done by a smart fellow, but it doesn't appear he's actually worked very much with systemd as every criticism is inaccurate, or at the very least an unsubstantiated opinion. For example, his assertion that systemd more then "doubles the attack surface" of a hardened computer is pretty silly. In fact I'm not even sure what he's getting at there.
Unlike the Epoch author, I have no dog in the race. I just get tired of inaccurate criticisms of systemd by folks who've never even worked with systemd, or have any real knowledge of how it works. Having built an init system, the author of Epoch does have grounds to analyze and criticize systemd.