Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ...
- Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 13:40:08 -0600 (MDT)
- From: "John L. Ries" <jries@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ...
You do have your choice of distros and most distros provide wide
lattitude as to what software to install, what GUI (if any) to run, what
shell to use (my preferred poison is ksh, not bash), etc. I'm not all
that fond of systemd myself (though my relationship with it is
improving), but there are still distros that use old fashioned init
(Slackware comes to mind).
And all of the above constitutes a lot more choice than you get from
either Apple or Microsoft.
John L. Ries |
Salford Systems |
Phone: (619)543-8880 x107 |
or (435)867-8885 |
On Monday 2017-03-13 13:30, Patrick Bartek wrote:
>Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 13:30:11
>From: Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@xxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ...
>Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 19:30:41 +0000
>The Linux mantra has always been "choice," plethoras of choices. So why
>at install time, is there no choice for the init system? You get what
>the developers decide. Yes, you can install a new one -- I've done it
>and it works -- but only after the install. It'd be a lot easier, if
>there were a choice to begin with just like whether you want a GUI and
>Now, I know with LFS, you get to choose everything, etc. But is a
>choice of init at install time so outrageous that no one ever
>considered it or is it technically unfeasible or something else.