systemd / active (exited)

[Gene Heskett]

On Saturday 31 August 2019 04:45:18 Ralf Mardorf via ubuntu-users wrote:

> On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 13:48:44 +0100, Peter Flynn wrote:
> >On 30/08/2019 13:10, Ralf Mardorf via ubuntu-users wrote:
> >> On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 11:44:03 +0200, Liam Proven wrote:
> >
> >[...]
> >
> >>> Perhaps the ancients were right. Perhaps there are some things
> >>> mankind was not _meant_ to understand.
> >
> >Brexit being one of them :-)
>
> It's not that hard to understand the reason for something irrational
> such as the Brexit. Actually it's possible to understand systemd good
> enough to use it, nowadays it at least is easier to accept systemd,
> than using Linux with another init system and since it's just computer
> stuff, it's way easier to avoid trouble while using systemd, than to
> suffer from  way older issues, such as those related to general human
> survival.
>
> If we thought out "things" we are abused to be ambivalent or to suffer
> from a personality disorder, while it's normal, for "normal" humans to
> consider something as "Mit Scheidung.de finden Sie Ihr Glück!" -
> https://www.scheidung.de/ as normal. IOW for me it's not
> understandable why being ambivalent in the first place is an issue,
> but doing something stupid in the first place is considered to be
> rational.
>
> If we do something wrong in the first place, we usually realize that
> it is wrong after around 3 days, current psychology confirms this
> (at least read the ICD or way better the DSM), we actually could
> stop to continue doing it, but that is considered to be sick. In work
> life, relationships and societies it's preferred to go with the flow,
> even if there's no doubt that is fatally wrong. Nothing is new of what
> is told by Greta Thunberg, it was already known in the seventies.
> Societies have got tendencies to stay with something wrong until it's
> too late and then they hype it.
>
> However, it doesn't matter if systemd is a good or bad init system
> compared to other init systems. It has got not much influence to our
> computer usage. For some of us it might be an annoyance, but even then
> it's nothing more than an annoyance, it's not something fatally wrong.
>
> No joke, breaking the seals and reading the fine manual helps to
> workaround annoyances. It is not comparable to the "real" issues of
> live.
>
> Joking apart, systemd is double Dutch when it is new to somebody, but
> it is not a closed book, we are free to open the book.

However Ralf, finding the correct book to open seems like an endless list 
of broken links. Even the man pages, those that do exist, are either way 
out of date, or written in fictional swahili to me.  Where is the "pinfo 
systemd" that actually places the data needed by the user at his 
fingertips?

Changeing to systemd may in fact be a good idea, a decade down the log 
when all the organizational bugs have finally been addressed. But right 
now, I feel that the people writing the code are the only ones privy to 
the secret handshake.  That is not how linux works well as a general 
rules

Change for a good reason is generally good because the code will often be 
made more understandable and often faster.

Change for re-organization reasons are generally preceded by a "game 
plan" defining those reasons. Does it exist?  IDK. I've certainly not 
seen it if it does exist.

Changes just for the hell of it needs better docs than we are getting.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
 - Louis D. Brandeis
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>