[mdlug] Completely replacing Windows 98se with Linux!

[Aaron Kulkis]

Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
>> That's true. Iv'e notice that since openSuSE switched from the SysV
>> init system to the SystemD init system that
>> my computer has become... sluggish.
>
> I've seen nothing like that.  And I can't imagine why systemd would have
> much effect on overall performance.
>
>> And that is for software which was SUPPOSED to improve responsiveness,
>> right down to faster boot times.
>
> You are going from a speculation that this is the cause to an argument
> against the software.  Perhaps something else is causing the slow down?
>
>> Personally, I think it's because Sievert and Poettering are couple of
>> narcissistic gits, based on their track record.
>
> But they wrote code.
>

Precisely.  They have a habit of writing code that BREAKS everythiing else
that interacts with it.... they've now forced their misguided vision onto
every single deamon that is supposed to be started up during boot.

This violates ALL of the time-tested principles of good software design in
the Unix domain ... INTERCHANGEABILITY of systems.

Yes, SysV init was getting moldy in light of how laptops and portables are used,
but what they have done amounts to no less than vandalism.

All this bullshit of moving executables from /bin to /usr/bin, and then
making it neigh near impossible to configure a system to have a seperate
/usr filesystem... why?  Because those two assholes moved nearly all of the
executables needed to boot (such as mount) from /bin to /usr/bin.

So if you make a system with a separate /usr, it won't boot.  Instead of
making symbolic links from /bin to executables in /usr/bin, they could
have made symbolic links in /usr/bin to executables in /bin.  This would
have been the SANE, and LEAST DAMAGING way to do things.. but NOoooooooooooooo


There was ABSOLUTELY NO GOOD REASON to do this, other than to give
the finger to anyone and everyone.

I fully support Linux cutting off their commit privileges on the kernel --
Oh... our code doesn't behave properly .... let's modify OTHER WORKING
CODE TO DEAL WITH THE FUCK-UPS IN OUR CODE!!!!.  They did that with pulse
audio (wreaking havoc in ALSA)


Last but not least, they have invented the most damned convolute configuration
files in the Unix/Linux world... almost as bad as that god-awful monstrosity
called the Registry in Windows.

SysV config files were immensely comprehensible -- most of them, I didn't
even need to dig up documentation -- what was going on was self-evident.

Now I have to wade through 500 pages of documentation to even attempt the
slightest change.

And as time goes on, systemd gobbles up more and more and more of the system,
hmmm....now systemd directly encompasses mount, nfs, network interface control,
login, the system log, and on and on and on....

Where have I seen this sort of monolithic monstrosity before? Oh yeah, in
that giant kludge called windows.


Poettering and Sievert deserve to have their fingers chopped off, and their accomplice,
Greg Krao-Hartman with them, too.


One thing you can ALWAYS count on a German to do is to over-complicate the
simplest thing (ever get an estimate to do even the simplest mechanical
work on the engine of a German car?  IT's through the roof, and NOT due to
expensive parts, nor due to the mechanic charging 5x the rate as other
mechanics... no, the reason is that it takes 5x the man-hours to do the work.

Example... a friend of mine needed a new thermostat in a modern (front-engine)
VW bug... 5 FREAKING HOURS of labor!

But at least with MOST of these monstrosities, the trade-off for insanely
complicated systemss is one that is tweaked to within 0.5% of optimum.

Is that true for systemD?  No.


Broken by design: systemd
http://ewontfix.com/14


If that's not damning enough for you, then read this:

Systemd has 6 service startup notification types, and they're all wrong
http://ewontfix.com/15


So far, the three vandals have yet to offer a rebuttal, or otherwise defend
against the charge... and it's been 6 months now.

Why?   Because the charges made at ewontfix.com are absolutely accurate.


Yes, SysV init needs to be replaced.  But if SystemD is the answer, then
we might as well go back to the 1960's.