Choose Your Side On the Linux Divide 826
snydeq writes The battle over systemd exposes a fundamental gap between the old Unix guard and a new guard of Linux developers and admins, writes Deep End's Paul Venezia. "Last week I posted about the schism brewing over systemd and the curiously fast adoption of this massive change to many Linux distributions. If there's one thing that systemd does extremely well, it is to spark heated discussions that devolve into wild, teeth-gnashing rants from both sides. Clearly, systemd is a polarizing subject. If nothing else, that very fact should give one pause. Fundamental changes in the structure of most Linux distributions should not be met with such fervent opposition. It indicates that no matter how reasonable a change may seem, if enough established and learned folks disagree with the change, then perhaps it bears further inspection before going to production. Clearly, that hasn't happened with systemd."
Discordian date (Score:4, Funny)
Never mind trivial things like systemd - the real watershed moment for Old Unix vs New Linux was back in 2011, when a humourless package maintainer excluded 'ddate' from the default build of util-linux:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D... [wikipedia.org]
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/ut... [kernel.org]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/sh... [redhat.com]
Re:My opinion on the matter. (Score:3, Funny)
Translation: "Why should I learn from the mistakes made in the past? I'll just make them all over again.
I doubt you'll manage to repeat ALL of the mistakes of the past. You'd have to be pretty clever to do that. But with sufficient effort and diligence, you can probably manage to repeat most of them. And maybe even come up with one or two truly innovative cock-ups that we old timers overlooked.