| |||||||||||||
Remarks about the benchmarkRemarks about the benchmarkPosted Dec 2, 2012 23:36 UTC (Sun) by HelloWorld (guest, #56129)In reply to: Remarks about the benchmark by dlang Parent article: Langasek: Upstart in Debian
> many people have listed problems, you don't consider any of them 'real' and just dismiss them, so you aren't worth arguing with.
I've been presenting arguments in favour of systemd again and again in this thread; you didn't refute any of them. I've been asking you and oldtomas over and over again to name technical arguments in favour of other init systems; you didn't name one.
And now YOU are accusing ME of ignoring other people's arguments? Sorry, you're ridiculous.
(Log in to post comments)
Remarks about the benchmark Posted Dec 17, 2012 16:43 UTC (Mon) by wookey (subscriber, #5501) [Link]
You really don't get it do you?
Read what tuomas wrote again and see if you can understand why your forthright advocacy is not helping.
It no longer an entirely technical question.
In principle I don't care at all what my init system is, but currently, after reading many of these threads and comparing what the upstart people say in comparison to what the systemd people say, and especially the way some of them say it, it's looking as if upstart is the preferable init system for me. Compare your posts with vorlon's in this particular thread, for example (approx bout 6 of this particular fight).
Did you see that? it wasn't a technical argument. You will dismiss it along with all the previous ones. You still won't have got me on your side.
Remarks about the benchmark Posted Dec 17, 2012 17:28 UTC (Mon) by raven667 (subscriber, #5198) [Link]
> ... comparison to what the systemd people say, and especially the way some of them say it, it's looking as if upstart is the preferable init system for me
I would just like to point out that regardless of what HelloWorld or oldthomas or you or I say it doesn't change the design and implementation of Upstart and systemd so there are real technical arguments and you can safely ignore partisans and fan-bois on either end.
For my part the systemd design of dependancy resolution for process startup, the process monitoring and watchdog that gets rid of the need for daemontools, the reliable process shutdown and ability to have multiple instances of a particular daemon without having to do brain surgery, the simple config file format with includes and clear overrides that allows one to repeatably set up the process runtime environment, the built-in support for all the Linux container and security and resource management features and on and on and on are reasons why I think systemd is the better tool.
It's kind of similar to the arguments around SVN and git replacing CVS, there are real technical reasons why so many distros who didn't find enough value to make the jump to Upstart are jumping to systemd.
Remarks about the benchmark Posted Dec 17, 2012 18:03 UTC (Mon) by wookey (subscriber, #5501) [Link]
Right, but ultimately either of these init systems will clearly work fine for undemanding users, so I'm (currently) inclined to give my (rather limited) support to the inclusive one not the one with all the irritating w*ankers in tow. Ultimately I'm happy that changing my mind is a simple apt-get away anyway, as I'm a Debian user, and I appreciate that people have made the effort to give me that choice. I think that's important.
And relating to your analogy, I'm one of the people that much prefers SVN over git, so am clearly a hopeless luddite anyway. :-)
|
|||||||||||||