Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

[Miles Fidelman <mfidelman () meetinghouse net>]

Hey... how about not using selective editing to change the thread of 
discussion (see below)

Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Miles Fidelman
> <mfidelman () meetinghouse net> wrote:
> > Re. NTP: Timekeeping is rather essential in lots of applications - like, for
> > example, transit operations, where I currently spend my work life.  An
> > accurate, accessible central clock tends to be a rather important system
> > component.  And we're talking concerns in the range of seconds.  When you
> > start getting into serious real-time systems (laboratory instrumentation,
> > utility operations, warfighting, ....) - yeah, NTP servers start getting
> > really interesting, to a lot of people.
> As I've already said a couple of times, systemd does not force a
> particular NTP implementation on you.  It comes with one (timedated),
> and has a utility to manage it (timedatectl) but the admin can install
> and use a different one if they like.
>
> The only thing that has changed recently with respect to that is that
> timedatectl can no longer be used to manage chronyd or ntpd.

What you snipped out of the message was YOUR previous statement, to 
which I was responding:

> systemd is a tool designed to get the system to a state where "real
> work" can be done.  NTP servers, DHCP clients, consoles, aren't the
> real work of a system, or at least I hope not, because that would be
> boring to me. 

If you're going to simply keep repeating "I like systemd, everything is 
copacetic" - maybe you should take your fanboy attitude elsewhere, and 
let those of us concerned with operational impacts have a meaningful 
conversation here.  And maybe, you should check out some of the upstream 
bug reports re. systemd interactions with NTP.

Plonk.

Miles Fidelman

--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra