<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 TRANSITIONAL//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; CHARSET=UTF-8">
<META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="GtkHTML/4.6.6">
</HEAD>
<BODY>
hello all<BR>
<BR>
I've just read this artic.<BR>
<A HREF="http://0pointer.net/blog/revisiting-how-we-put-together-linux-systems.html">http://0pointer.net/blog/revisiting-how-we-put-together-linux-systems.html</A><BR>
<BR>
What do you think guyes?<BR>
Does systemd really want to be the 'core-engine' for an OS? It sound ridiculous for me. As I remember their target was (only) replace the init, then they did more and more, they pushed the targets over and over, which is not bad but just think.<BR>
<BR>
1) replace init - get a new process/service scheduler/maintaner<BR>
2) write a new logging system.............journalctl<BR>
3) hard-code the dhcp and ntp client into systemd... why? just gain the control.........<BR>
maybe there were more, I haven't read everything about systemd......<BR>
4) anything could be, like the article... what next? replace the kernel, write an own X and GUI for only systemd?<BR>
and in the future we will have systemd OS for money which was developed by community and some people just gain the lead and control. They will displace everything else, and convince the HW and SW vendor (proprietary) to ship their product to systemd OS then <FONT COLOR="#2c2c2c">voilà</FONT>, they win. <BR>
<BR>
I have a bad feeling, systemd will become a 'perfect' OS then the systemd owners will change the license to commercial and they will just use the community code (the US lawyers can reach anything) and they will have a perfect code and get billions of money.<BR>
Maybe I have watched too many films but all steps lead to the same direction.<BR>
<BR>
Balint<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</BODY>
</HTML>