BLU Discuss list archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Discuss] systemd explanations
- Subject: [Discuss] systemd explanations
- From: ingegnue at riseup.net (IngeGNUe)
- Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 21:10:20 -0500
- In-reply-to: <20160219014622.GC10548@dragontoe.org>
- References: <56C53172.2010709@riseup.net> <56C553DC.9000004@gmail.com> <CAJ=RwfbRD1jeq=cCnznzi1SXnBaotfPXy-FD5LL-HD1dgwW19w@mail.gmail.com> <56C5F569.4050005@gmail.com> <20160219014622.GC10548@dragontoe.org>
On 02/18/16 20:46, Derek Martin wrote: > On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 11:46:33AM -0500, Rich Pieri wrote: >> Which is not to say that I would be uncritical of systemd, just that my >> criticisms would be more focused on the technical aspects. > > =8^) > >From this discussion primer, I'm actually really looking forward to hearing the back and forth about technical aspects of systemd in the next presentation. :) Steve Litt makes a great point: one doesn't have to like sysvinit or upstart to be skeptical of systemd. IngeGNUe
- Follow-Ups:
- [Discuss] systemd explanations
- From: slitt at troubleshooters.com (Steve Litt)
- [Discuss] systemd explanations
- References:
- [Discuss] systemd explanations
- From: ingegnue at riseup.net (IngeGNUe)
- [Discuss] systemd explanations
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Rich Pieri)
- [Discuss] systemd explanations
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Rich Pieri)
- [Discuss] systemd explanations
- From: invalid at pizzashack.org (Derek Martin)
- [Discuss] systemd explanations
- Prev by Date: [Discuss] systemd explanations
- Next by Date: [Discuss] What was once old is new again...
- Previous by thread: [Discuss] systemd explanations
- Next by thread: [Discuss] systemd explanations
- Index(es):