[ale] Debian fork thoughts?

[leam hall]

On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Jerald Sheets <questy at gmail.com> wrote:
> That’s a bit of a leading question.  SystemD *works*, it just doesn’t *work* in the way that many like it to work.
>
> Many of us are saddled with its use, and have to grok, embrace, and use it due to our place in the market.  I can install a ~200MB Debian system with SystemD installed and works…. your later message in this thread, however, betrays your position:  “It’s not your cup of tea”.  That’s a lot different than the implied “it doesn’t work” by saying “OS that works”.
>
>
> Not a biggie, but the thesis of your note implied a lot and colored the conversation.  I like full disclosure.  :-D
>
> —jms

I agree. My opinion is colored by having to maintain  heterogeneous
environments. Yes, systemd and smf exist and yes, I dislike both of
them. Didn't really care for upstart either.

The idea of an improved init system isn't a bad one. For example, Red
Hat's chkconfig and service stuff was good because it let you manage
things easier but didn't break the underlying init systems. Someone
from a Solaris or HP/UX background could still function with it.

In general I prefer a light weight system to a tightly coupled and
pervasive one. That is a personal preference that may change with
time. I hope I'm smart enough to see "good stuff" when it gets here.
That's the hope, anyway.

That's one of the reasons I like Puppet; it lets me deal with the OS
at a different level and not have to worry as much about the
underlying changes. I don't have to deal with systemd if I don't want
to.  :)

The past several months have included a mental debate on micro vs
macro programming. Do I want to get deeper into the OS or further back
with something like Puppet. In the end, I want to get paid and I'm
marginally better at macro than micro.

That does not make opinions like Solomon's wrong. I don't agree with
it but we're fine with disagreement.

Leam

-- 
Mind on a Mission