seems reasonable on its own, but knowing the track record of EU regulations... Even this sounds dodgy

>they decided to do this test under their

what language is this?

>Try running any part of the systemd software suite on an openrc system and see how that works out?

Well from this POV it's kinda openrc's problem if it doesn't. What about trying to run any part of the Openrc software suite on an Upstart system? The question why would anyone sane want to is rhetorical tho...

Why obsessing over whether systemd is monolithic and in what measure anyway? There certainly ARE optional systemd parts. So it's correct to say it's not entirely monolithic.

openrc-init can be used on an upstart system, the daemon manager itself can't but that's because you'd have two different daemon managers. Beyond that there aren't any openrc software components, because it was designed to be a modular init system that just handles what it was intended to handle.

The rest of the system for example chrony, sysklogd, cron, etc run fine on upstart systems, because they aren't tied to systemd and are fully modular.

It's okay to be a monolith, that doesn't make it inherently bad or anything, but we should be honest about it, and it does come with some tradeoffs.

Some good context...

And did so in its (or rather Bram's) own, incompatible with Neovim way. I imagine that's the biggest problem with Vim why Neovim was even created - hardcore NIH syndrome of Vim's main author.

Yet you just went and created a new (burner?) acc just to post this absolute tripe here.

Will this work be of any use tho?

not initially, but it's the genisis

Sounds nice for sure.

And no-one remembered Loom..

Thumb drives in the early 2000s weren't all that ubiquitous to put it mildly.

Neither was carrying around one's dev environment entire or partial.

You're quite an early adopter.

Back in the early '90s, an envelope was delivered to me containing a physical 3.5 inch diskette. The contents was a Smalltalk/V 286 image file. A bug had been found in a program I'd written a couple of years earlier.

The client had saved the program state (including the full dev environment) at the bug (and exported their current data to CSV files, just in case). I stepped into the debugger, fixed the problem, saved the new image file to a 3.5 inch diskette, went to the post office and sent it back to them.

Of course they had continued working but I don't recall which approach they took to merging their new data with the corrected program.

The past is a foreign country …

Nice.

Too bad 99% of real world (c)(tm) workloads don't look kindly on hauling not only a debugger but "the full dev environment" in every product shipped out there...

A blinding setup otherwise ngl.

We carried our dev environment in floppies, then ZIP disks, then external disks.

I started doing that with Turbo Pascal + MS-DOS 3.3 on HD floppies.

OP just jummped in when thumb drives started being available.

Good for you I guess.

Too bad the whole world isn't the MIT Campus/Silicon Valley.

The Chinese are most likely steaming ahead with the drone armies.