Web lists-archives.com

Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ...






On 3/14/17 4:37 AM, Liam O'Toole wrote:
On 2017-03-13, Erwan David <erwan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Le 03/13/17 à 20:40, Greg Wooledge a écrit :
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 12:30:11PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
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
which one.
Because the number of people who want to run a new version of Debian with
an ancient and deprecated init system is probably in the triple digits,
worldwide.

You are a member of a small minority.  It's not reasonable to expect
that a whole bunch of time will be spent making install images with
alternative init systems for such a small demand.  You have a solution
which works just fine.

So why don't you use windows, if you despise minorities ?
Using Windows on a server or a phone would put you in a minority.

Your email is both insulting and contemptful. If this is your only
argument, that's bad for the point you pretend to denfend.
You are overreacting. Greg's point is that there is little demand for an
installer which allows a choice of init system, and that spending time
on providing such an installer would not be justified. You are welcome
to disagree with that assessment, but please leave out the emotional
codswallop.

There USED TO BE a lot of demand for a choice of installer at init time - from pretty much all of us who object to systemd. Nobody listened, eventually people gave up, and a lot moved to other distros.

Miles Fidelman


--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.  .... Yogi Berra