On 01/11/2015 10:25 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 01/11/2015 08:50 PM, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wrote: >> On 01/11/2015 09:38 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: >>> On Sun, January 11, 2015 8:29 pm, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wrote: >>>> On 01/11/2015 09:24 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: >>>>> On Sun, January 11, 2015 7:29 pm, Keith Keller wrote: >>>>>> On 2015-01-12, Valeri Galtsev <galtsev at kicp.uchicago.edu> wrote: >>>>>>> PS I guess I just mention it. I'm quite happy about CentOS (or RedHat >>>>>>> if >>>>>>> I >>>>>>> look back). One day I realized how happy I am that I chose RedHat way >>>>>>> back, - that was when all Debian (and its clones like Ubuntu,...) >>>>>>> admins >>>>>>> were fighting with the consequences of this: >>>>>>> http://www.debian.org/security/2008/dsa-1571 . If I had Debian >>>>>>> machine >>>>>>> I >>>>>>> would not only regenerate all key pairs, certs, etc. I would question >>>>>>> sanity of that box then, and will not be certain what confidential >>>>>>> stuff >>>>>>> could have been stolen from it... I realized then that that level big >>>>>>> flop >>>>>>> never happened to RedHat. I couldn't even point to something that >>>>>>> would >>>>>>> constitute big flop RedHat of then. One only criticizes something >>>>>>> while >>>>>>> one cares about it ;-) >>>>>> Heartbleed was pretty scary, no? I'd consider that at least as bad as >>>>>> the predictable number generator issue. >>>>>> >>>>> Well, heratbleed and shellshock were pretty much global: all systems >>>>> (not >>>>> only Linuxes, not to say particular Linux distributions - my FreeBSD >>>>> boxes >>>>> were affected too) using openssl or bash were affected... Same bad, yet >>>>> these were not flops of particular distribution, so whichever system >>>>> you >>>>> decided to stick with , you had these. Not certain about you, but this >>>>> kind of makes difference for me. When I say I'm happy about [me >>>>> choosing >>>>> way back] RedHat heartbleed, no heartbleed, no difference. >>>>> >>>>> Valeri >>>>> >>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> Valeri Galtsev >>>>> Sr System Administrator >>>>> Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics >>>>> Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics >>>>> University of Chicago >>>>> Phone: 773-702-4247 >>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> CentOS mailing list >>>>> CentOS at centos.org >>>>> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >>>> I guess everyone will have an opinion of systemd whether it be good or >>>> bad. The only resolution is to either use a distro that has systemd on >>>> it, use a distro that DOESN'T have systemd on it...or build your OWN >>>> distro and don't include systemd! I guess when it all boils down to it, >>>> there's STILL choice.....even when it doesn't seem like there is! >>>> >>> I wouldn't quite agree with you about someone building one's own Linux >>> distro without systemd. You see, systemd _IS_ in the mainstrem Linux >>> kernel which you imminently have to use. Having distro with kernel to >>> that >>> level not mainstream, so systemd related stuff is stripped off it is >>> quite >>> a task. Less that writing one's own kernel and building system based on >>> it, still... >>> >>> Valeri >>> >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> Valeri Galtsev >>> Sr System Administrator >>> Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics >>> Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics >>> University of Chicago >>> Phone: 773-702-4247 >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> _______________________________________________ >>> CentOS mailing list >>> CentOS at centos.org >>> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >> I am sorry...you're right. I was basing that statement on the devs who >> forked Debian to make Devuan. I assumed that they are building a version >> of the linux kernel with no systemd in it. (Maybe I'm wrong?....will >> have to check out a few articles and find out what's really going on!) >> My apologies...once again.... > No, you are correct. They would just have to figure out how to do it on > their own in a way that works. > > The bottom line is that every bit of the code that is used for CentOS is > released to everyone. One needs to either use what is compiled or be > smart enough to take the source code and make it do what they want. > > That can be done .. but it is much easier to bitch about what someone > else is doing that actually do something themselves .. so what you will > see is a bunch whinning all over the Internet and people using whatever > is released .. because the whinners are too lazy to actually work on an > open source project. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos I will admit to being a bit of a whiner when I first came to Linux, and it was over the massive changes that took place in Gnome 3. it was so long ago that I can't even remember what I was complaining about,...but after like a month the issue was "reverted" back, or reinstated, and I've never complained since then. And the reason I don't complain anymore?..I had gotten an email response once (will have to dig through the millions I have to find it!...unless I deleted it..) from a person who worked on a project, it wasn't the one I had been complaining about but it was something popular, and he went into great detail as to what is needed and required of him on a daily basis just to make sure this project "worked" for the millions of people who would download it. After reading his story....I will NEVER complain again! These people dedicate a LOT of their personal time to working on these things and its kinda unfair to whine about one little feature to them when they've got bugs to fix....features to improve upon....updates to address and then make sure its compatible with not only what's current..but what's "older" as well. So yeah....you guys won't hear a peep out of me regarding systemd....or anything else for that matter....unless of course its a valid bug that needs to be dealt with! LoL! EGO II