-=> Accession wrote to Arelor <=-
Ac> Huh. I had no idea any of that was going on. However, I do remember
Ac> Debian being one of the first to switch to systemd fully, just didn't
Ac> know it became a political thing (I guess the better question is, what
Ac> _doesn't_ become political these days?). Thanks for the explanation!
I never saw what the deal was with systemd. I came from the BSDs and
rc files, init.d and systemd seemed similar by comparison.
Ac> There's the few that have always been 'windowsized', but most have kept
Ac> a pretty basic install (netboot, non-gui, whatever you want to call
Ac> it). They leave it up to the user to add all the frill they want to it,
Ac> and most users want the frill. You can argue that till your face turns
Ac> blue, but that's honestly the only reason Linux has gained (albeit not
Ac> very much) the traction it has over the years. Otherwise, people would
Ac> still *only* be using Linux as servers, to this day.
Yeah, Ubuntu, probably one of the most desktop/window-focused distros
out there, still had a server distro - and others have the ability to
select servers and deselect any window manager.
I still like having a low-end window manager to be able to have multiple
xterms running...
> I am not a Devuan fan, exactly, but I can use it as a drop-in
> replacement for most tasks I would have used Debian in the past and
> its default configuration comes with a bit less overhead. And with no
> systemd.
I thought devuan was just a non-GPL free version of Debian? Or was that
Trisquel?
--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.
|
