Slashdot Mirror
SUSE Linux Sold For $2.5 Billion (reuters.com)
Archangel Michael writes: Reuters is reporting that Britain's Micro Focus has agreed to sell its SUSE open-source enterprise software business to Swedish buyout group EQT Partners for $2.535 billion, lifting its shares 6 percent. Micro Focus, a serial acquirer that has been struggling to get to grips with a $8.8 billion Hewlett Packard Enterprise deal, said on Monday it would use some of the proceeds to reduce debt and could return some of the rest to shareholders. SUSE is used by banks, universities and government agencies around the world and is a pioneer in enterprise-grade Linux software serving companies such as Air India, Daimler and Total.
Lol systemd isnâ(TM)t going anywhere. Better get used to it!
If SuSE is worth $2.5B, then what is Slackware worth?
All the main distros use it because it is good, a huge improvement.
If it is causing you problems, my advice is to look for some kind of "linux for dummies" type of book. Or better, stop pretending you're a sysadmin and breaking your web terminal; try sticking to the stuff in the GUI menu.
Ahah !!! What a bunch of suckers ! You can get it for free on the website !!! ;)
Silly buyer! I could have downloaded a copy for you way cheaper.
Read a book or take a class if there's something you can't figure out. Don't ossify in place or you'll be first on the layoffs list.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
I wish I could get to a command line prompt, nevermind a GUI, when using systemd/GNU/Linux. Too often I've experienced a systemd/GNU/Linux installation failing to boot fully because systemd screwed up in some obscure and dumb way. It doesn't matter how good you are at using the command line if the systemd/GNU/Linux installation can't even reliably get that far in the boot process!
I've never gad that experience with systemd installing Mageia6. What distro are you using?
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
Will be interesting on how this works out with 'big banks', COBOL, SUSE and IBM Mainframes
Hey buddy, Slackware still has up-to-date libs and apps. Not that any poseurs would know.
Wrong. All the professional systems admins I know curse it, it is bad. I admin hundreds of systems and am sorry I'm being forced to upgrade them into the bloated, unstable, needlessly complicated garbage that is systemd.
It does not belong on enterprise servers, it is bad enginering.
Linux wins again! and again! and again!
Donald Trump keeps winning.
All this WINNING is just too awesome for words!
MAGA, baby, MAGA!
Is that the same Micro Focus that once offered a COBOL compiler for Radio Shack and CP/M computers?
All the main distros use it because it is good, a huge improvement.
SystemD is 2010s version of Microsoft wizards of the 1990s.
... wait, what ARE you doing? What IS that? Never mind, I'll just ignore it." And it gets confused or out of sync. And on any breakage, even better, now YOU'RE confused as well, and even worse YOU literally don't know what's going on.
;-) you begin to wonder.
They're great. They really are. They're easy to use, helpful, and just work.
That is until they don't. And then you're screwed
"Domain interpreters", if you will, are superb at what they do. They make all of the hard stuff "go away", kinda like programming libraries. That is, as long as you stay WITHIN their domain and do things as expected.
The moment you take one minor baby step outside what they expect or control, it all goes to Hell. It's confused because: "You're doing
SystemD hasn't broken on me yet, but I've heard horror stores of non-standard or even not-quite-mainstream configs that work and then they suddenly won't. And if you look at some of the bugs Pottering has declared WONTFIX (referred to by that random ignored bastion of unworthyness
The best thing about domain interpreters is that in a must-work complex situation is that you have to call for help. And who better than your distro maintainer? And then no reason at all, guess who SystemD's main author, Pottering, is employed by?
Oh, Debian is the literal base for a bunch of distros, including Ubuntu. RedHat also supports a few you might have heard of. You might be interested in the Debian vote for SystemD.
I'm a RHCE, SuSE something, Microsoft something, Novell CNE, and what-all else, or at least was -- retired, so guess I don't count anymore. Once I get my storage usage under control, I'm beginning a move to FreeBSD.
If you've "broken your web terminal" you should run "reset". And your homepage seems to be currently down, BTW.
If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
Blog post: https://www.suse.com/c/further...
Which book?
Perhaps this book
Yes. https://www.microfocus.com/pro...
Post says SuSE is used by banks, etc., but many companies also use it. I know the servers at local Wal-marts are using it, for example.
on a headless debian system, I had the joy of systemd dropping out to an emergency shell
Trouble was SSH wasn't up and running at this point so it was impossible to access this emergency shell.
The reason for the emergency, an external data drive wasn't present.
Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
At Microsoft we used Redhat EL for flashing and testing windows phones in production but not for desktop/office work.
Thanks for the illustration.
It's the attitude of types like you which kept me from even wanting to try systemd. Some of its ideas I do like, some I don't. But if it comes with that attitude, I don't want it.
Using Debian stretch, without systemd. Works like a charm.
hobbyist projects like Devuan
Anecdata: Devuan seems surprisingly solid so far, doesn't feel like a hobby project at all. I've deployed it to the computer of my parents after their systemd based distro went down the shitter (RIP, rc.local); the only issue I had to implement manually was a bit of shutdown from GUI/switch user/etc logic.
Would use it on my own computers too if I weren't using *BSD.
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
This. I've yet to meet a full time unix admin (and that doesn't mean a basement dweller who managed to install ubuntu on their laptop) who actually liked it or could make a good case for it.
It's usually something along the lines of "well, yes, can't deny that our service (non-)management could use some improvement so I can see the original drive behind systemd, but it's a complete dumpster fire at this point"
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to figure out why rc.local is run before half the other services; what actually causes it to run and with what environment. Too bad this is not a matter of debugging shell scripts anymore. Because recompiling systemd with debug symbols and then hooking up a debugger to it is so much better.
Except not.
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
I haven't had any trouble with systemD on my infrastructure. Well, not since I rebuilt it all on OpenBSD.
Most professional system administrators that I know detest systemd
RIP rc.local? Seriously?
Why are you systemd haters still thinking that systemd is exact replica of sysvinit, but newer code? It is not. It is a completely different, new system, with new paradigms. You don't do rc.local under systemd, you write a proper service and get the FULL advantage of the entire process management API. You can even run "user services" that don't require root to be set up, for additional benefit.
It's okay if you want your 1970s UNIX unchanged and unschated in 2018. That's perfectly fine, honestly, not a sarcasm.
But then PLEASE, oh PLEASE, do continue to use your UNIX systems in your own niche and STOP shitting on the rest of the world progressing forwards. There's BSD for you, Solaris, and you can maybe unearth some old 5" floppies and convert to USB sticks. There's old 32-bit hardware still around being sold on craigslists of the world. Hey, FreeBSD users have been at the frontlines for the defense of floppies and against the removal if floppy driver in the kernel, so those floppies could be used directly.
It's prefectly fine, it's alright. You can continue using 1970s UNIX paradigms, nobody is taking them away from you. You just stay away from NEW paradigms, both in usage AND discussion of them, and everything will be fine for everyone.
Well, too bad that you misconfigured your /etc/fstab then.
This is a classic mistake and I encountered the same issue on Ubuntu 12.04 with upstart, it's not systemd specific.
Why are you so threatened by a differing view?
For the record, many distros ship an rc.local.service unit file, which *claims* to emulate rc.local behavior. Perhaps that's what the grandparent is talking about. Your proper response didn't help much, either. The only 1970's UNIX thing that's still around is sysvinit. Have you not seen BSD init? OpenRC? runit? s6? s6 is quite well architected, and uses as many standard tools as it can rather than baking everything into a large, stand-alone 50+ binary repository.
You're mistaking the action of walking forward with the act of actual progress. Arguably, systemd's biggest win comes in the Web service world, where containers and VMs rule it all and CS grads can jerk off about their endless layers of abstraction. It serves the needs of the mental masturbator very well.
The reason for the emergency, an external data drive wasn't present.
So admin did something incredibly stupid requiring the automounting of an external device at boot time and is upset that his misconfiguration caused his system to boot.
Got it.
SystemD hasn't broken on me yet
You must have read the manual. Don't do that. What you're supposed to do is assume nothing has changed from the sysvinit days, copy and paste everything, not learn how to setup a unit file, and then complain when it all goes to shit.
wouldn't surprise me in the least.
All the main distros use it because it is good, a huge improvement.
If it is causing you problems, my advice is to look for some kind of "linux for dummies" type of book. Or better, stop pretending you're a sysadmin and breaking your web terminal; try sticking to the stuff in the GUI menu.
you are kidding right?
systemd is bringing MS and Apple grade development to Linux.
do you remember this https://github.com/systemd/sys... ?
this one https://github.com/systemd/sys... ?
and there's another ridiculous one with the usernames allowed or forbidden by logind.
The problem with systemd is not systemd, but its dev team.
The worst part of pettering's(I know he hates it when his name is mi-spelled) development is the fact that he chooses sometimes to have systemd taking decisions because systemd take into consideration that targets users but other times systemd doesn't have to take decisions because systemd is supposed to be configured by maintainers and not by users.
I know that some other smaller init might not have the sources or the influence and funding that systemd has by redhat, but when you complain to those devs that their s/w is causing rm to brick motherboards, they prevent it and they add to their documentation that if you want to write to some special block that affects your motherboard's firmware, you should, as a dev, remount it with w+. Peotterring otoh, says that's not a bug and you shouldn't rm -rf / .
A guy walk into a doctors office.
-Doctor, when I do this my arm hurts.
-Then don't do it. [not a bug][closed]
Nobody wakes up one day and decides to shit on peotterring via github tickets. The guy is just a code monkey, yeah those exist in C dev too, and is unable to steer or manage projects.
I'd suggest you read a "logic for dummies" type of book.
I use a CentOS 7 as a development workstation and multiple test, staging and production servers. All with systemd. It is reliable and gives me no trouble at all.
Perhaps that's what the grandparent is talking about
Then it's not RIP if it's supported, is it? I'm pretty sure that's not what gp meant.
and uses as many standard tools as it can rather than baking everything into a large, stand-alone 50+ binary repository.
Like the BSDs, which are just that, one large repository of base system tools, each? It is funny how all these systemd refugees want to escape the "giant standalone 50+ binary repository" -- by migrating to another, giant, standalone 50+ binary repository, but in the BSD family.
And also you're making exactly the same mistake over again, like all systemd haters. Systemd is NOT an init. NOT AN INIT. It's a whole project, middleware, with init, process manager and a lot of other tools being part of it.
The problem is EXACTLY in expecting systemd to be JUST an init and then when it turns out it isn't, you all start comparing apples to oranges, the whole systemd ecosystem against one INIT, be it sysv, openrc, or whichever.
You're mistaking the action of walking forward with the act of actual progress.
In this particular case, having the entire process management API available through unit files with deprecation of rc.local and friends, IS progress.
Arguably, systemd's biggest win comes in the Web service world, where containers and VMs rule it all
You systemd haters need to get your contradicting arguments worked out. I thought the complaint was exactly the opposite - that systemd is useful on the desktop but not on the server?
> I would love to use a modern, well-supported enterprise-grade Linux distro that doesn't use systemd.
Why not use Devuan?
To the new owners of SuSE: please get rid of systemd!
It has caused me nothing but problems, and has made Linux effectively unusable. All of the main distros now use it, and the only ones that don't are ancient distros like Slackware, or hobbyist projects like Devuan and Gentoo.
I would love to use a modern, well-supported enterprise-grade Linux distro that doesn't use systemd. If SuSE could offer me this systemd-free Linux experience, I would seriously consider switching back to Linux from Windows.
Since you left Linux for Window$ - please stay there. Thank you.
Honest question.
What does SuSE offer that I cannot get from other distros?
Hmm, I dual boot with windows - and this is the main issue I've had with systemd
pre-systemd, windows would sometimes leave its FS in an "unclean" state, and upstart(?) would happily boot providing a warning about failing to mount the FS.
post-systemd, In the same situation, I get dropped into a limited shell, with no reason given, and a note to look at the log.
It's not a big issue for me, fixable, I can just remove those items from fstab (Note - I did not add them, the *buntu installer did!) - but still, this kind of things are a bigger problem for new users, make linux look bad, and can be a much more serious problem in a server environment.
I'd accept it failing to boot if it could not mount a partition it _needed_ to boot... but the way it is setup right now just seems silly.
If the problem is *him*, how come he's able to use SysVinit based systems fine?
There is always FreeBSD. It doesn't have systemd. :)
I'm still using SLES11 for our remaining Novell servers, for that reason. Can't last forever though.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
Why are you so threatened by a differing view?
I am not. I am just sick of having to read systemd hater tirades in totally unrelated threads. This article is about SUSE being sold. Nothing to do with systemd, but hey, the haters are still shitting all over the place, with continuously wrong and contradicting "arguments". You don't see me going into #devuan and shitposting about sysvinit, am I.
Just migrate to your BSDs and gtfo already.
You're mistaking the action of walking forward with the act of actual progress.
Most insightful line I've read all month.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
You need to check this presentation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MneolNxsErc
I used FreeBSD for my desktop for about two years.
There is a lot to love about FreeBSD. I think BSD would make a better server than any systemd linux.
However, if you want up-to-date desktop apps, FreeBSD does not cut it. I think other versions of BSD would be even worse.
I felt lucky to have apps that were only one year out of date. A lot of things, like dropbox, will not work at all.
BSDs are dependent on linux for their apps. Everything runs in a linux compatibility layer. If linux apps ever become dependent on systemd, that may be the end of BSD.
Maybe the best solution for systemd haters is Devaun?
Well systemd have done nothing but good for me. It simplify the init process, makes things unified and overall gives the admin better control. Also there is nothing preventing you from doing things the old way as well. There seems to be s few major myths in the Linux community and that is that BTRFS don't work and that systemd cause problems. None of these are true and it's a shame that people that claim otherwise don't understand what they are talking about.
systemd is actually pretty good. Basically, people have this idea that systemd forces you to do things one way and it takes away your choice to do it the old way. This is false and its a major misconception. systemd does not take away any functionality, it only adds additional functionality. What this means is you can still start services exactly as you have before. If you want to use sysvinit init, you can, just as you have before. In fact, it gives you a choice of what kind of init style to use. If you want to use sysvinit, you can with systemd. Because systemd has complete backward compatibility with sysvinit and does not deny people the ability to continue to start services as they have before, the objections against systemd lack merit, and are moot, and actually harmful as they are based on falsehoods and misconceptions.
Mainly, the opposition to systemd comes from people who do not think other people should be allowed to use the functionality that systemd offers, because systemd doesnt prevent you from using things the way you want to, it does not take away any fucntionality, sysvinit, it doesnt deny them the ability to use them the way they want to use it. So the systemd haters are the ones who want to take away users freedom and want to force their own preferences on everyone else. Devuan is ridiculous and unnecessary because anyone can use sysvinit on a systemd OS because systemd supports it.
systemd actually gives you more control over the system rather than being this automata so you can actually configure things more precisely than you could before, which dismisses this idea it has any similarity to Windows. There is none at all. Its an open source project, it has a high degree of control, flexibility and configurability.
I could not more strongly oppose getting rid of systemd. Those of us who have used its features would basically be fucked. Since systemd does not deny you the right to start your services the way you always have because systemd does not take away any existing functionality, its fully backward compatable with your sysvinit scripts, systemd does not take away anything from you. Those of us who have been using systemd's advanced features would be harmed if you had your way. this is all about YOU trying to FORCE your way on other people who you don't think should be allowed to use systemd, because systemd does not take away any functionality from you, since it is fully backward compatable with all of your sysvinit scripts. Bottom line: don't listen to systemd haters, they are full of it
The main distros all use it because RedHat use it and it's a lot of effort to strip it out.
And riddle me this: if it's that good why the need to force it upon users?
rare I'd agree with AC on technical matter of systems administration, but OpenBSD is indeed a far superior server platform compared to the Linux with which I make most my living. It even has a new sane init system it rolled out recently.
The Slashdot cirklejerk echo chamber in full display. I'm gonna counter your anecdote with mine and state I know plenty of linux admins, myself included, who manage farms with thousands of servers running systemd. Of course you're not gonna believe me but I don't care. I know you're full of shit because I see the opposite to what you're saying. Even managed to convert some diehard systemd haters when they saw the power of the API in *properly* configured services.
See, the trick here is to actually know you're doing. And unfortunately distro defaults are usually abysmal, written by maintainers who barely know what they're doing. I mean look at debian and their usage of start-stop-daemon inside systemd service files. Look and behold the most common cause for your startjobs and stopjobs and all the things that make you go and blame systemd:
https://salsa.debian.org/nginx-team/nginx/blob/master/debian/nginx-common.nginx.service
"I use a Windows 10 as a development workstation and multiple test, staging and production servers. All with the registry. It is reliable and gives me no trouble at all."
See Stephen, anecdotes are like assholes.
So all I have to do is change my entire workflow just because you can't manage a distro. Yea? Fuck you and eat shit.
Yea that's why you got marked troll. Because you have no clue what the fuck you are talking about. And enough people thought what you said was a complete lie and shit.
What are we taking away? Backwards compatible my ass.
Your whole post is you talking out of your ass. You sound clueless and are just parroting systemd shill propaganda.
TLDR: we don't believe systemd shills.
Seems you don't get it. Running sysv-rc init doesn't have the issue. On both my laptop and the one of my wife, I had configured the USB device to be mounted where I wanted to (I didn't really enjoy the /media stuff). On both, upgrade performed perfectly, only systemd refused to continue to boot because it didn't like the entry in fstab.
... it couldn't see the 2nd HDD of a RAID1 array. I saw it multiple times, as the 2nd SSD was going away of its socket in the Thinkpad ultrabay (fixed after a few of these failures with ... a piece of paper to prevent it to move!). Now, explain to me what the point is to have redundancy, if it is just to double the chances of failure to boot? And then what happens when the HDD is really dead?
This is *NOT* a problem by the sysadmin, this is a problem of change of behavior of the operating system caused by systemd. You will have a hard time convincing anyone that it's best to just stay stuck on an emergency shell rather than continuing to boot up to a point where the admin can do something with the compute.
I also had some very exasperating situation where systemd would refuse to boot because
Systemd has some good point. But it goes too far in many area, and has many troubles, nobody can deny that. To me, it's still a PoC. Maybe it will be reliable in 5 to 10 years from now...
> You must have read the manual.
Did you simply read one of them? systemd-* manuals are worse than what you can read on docs.microsoft.com.
systemctl is a great random sentence generator.
And my wife married somebody who likes systemd, so her computers work fine. Go figure!
Also, RAID 1 implies your data is really really important. If your data isn't important, and you're happy having it run on just one drive, why the fuck did you set it up for RAID 1? Give me a break. If you don't want your computer to spend time caring about your data, just use the second drive to hold regular backups from the first drive. If you want RAID 1 to be fully resistant to the loss of one drive, you need three drives. With two drives, the appropriate thing to do when a drive fails is to wait for a shutdown, and force your lazy ass to replace the drive. It is supposed to continue running with only one drive, it is not supposed to also start back up and pretend that your data is protected.
Maybe distros are happier without slowflake neckbeards as users? Maybe their use cases don't rank very high.
Maybe the stories of woe they tell would turn out to be total bullshit and they don't know how SysV works either. Maybe they flood the user forums of these distros with fake complaints, and people from the distros have spent the time to look into these horrible-sounding bugs only to find out, they're not bugs, they're not even misfeatures, the users just don't understand how the features they turned on work. They clicked shit, or typed shit, without checking what it does and didn't have enough knowledge to understand it once they broke it; and then it turns out, they didn't even have a use case for fucking with any of it. That's the sort of people who hate systemd loudly. That and old sysadmins who think they shouldn't have to read anymore because they read manuals in their 20s.
I suffered under SysV for years, it was the best of the crufty *nix. Good news, my old init scripts work just fine under systemd, but golly, the new stuff works better. I don't want to go back to that crap. It's like with AIX; it took IBM a decade of effort to get their DB2 clients to switch to linux. Clients refused to change, even though it sucked. IBM knew it sucked, because sysadmins using it needed a lot of help. IBM likes selling support contracts, but they don't want you to need to call them for support every day. So the same sysadmins that liked to call and have IBM hold their hands while they fixed something were the ones that didn't want to switch to a better OS that requires futzing. Now those same people are mad because ten years later, linux made changes and they had to learn something new again. Waa, waa, waa.
Why are you systemd haters still thinking that systemd is exact replica of sysvinit, but newer code?
Thinking that this what systemd haters think is next level stupid. Nobody thinks this since it is obvious that systemd is a huge crapton of stuff beyond that. Hell even the init program consists of dozens of kilolines worth of source (cue you demonstrating your lack of understanding by telling me the source file isn't that much bigger than sysvinit's).
It is not. It is a completely different, new system, with new paradigms.
Yeah. And both the system and the paradigms are a pile of crap. It's confused people like you who think "newer is better" in the software world, because it's generally like this for material things that are subject to wear over time.
You don't do rc.local under systemd
Yet enough systemd based distros offer rc.local.
you write a proper service and get the FULL advantage of the entire process management API.
Oh nice! I can't wait for the "FULL advantage of the entire process management API" (seriously you sound like an advertiser) when spinning down hard disks at after system bootup, and setting my keyboard layout. Incredibly helpful to have this run through a huge blob so what it fails (and it does), instead of debugging a shell script I have to rebuild systemd with debugging symbols and attach a debugger or trace it. Great value.
nobody is taking them away from you.
Except they are, by more and more stuff indirectly depending on systemd. Personally I run BSDs where I can, but I still feel the systemd breakage at work and on computers I maintain for others, like my parents. The other day I could no longer run Xfce on my parent's computer, because some dependencies of its dependencies of its dependencies now depend on systemd. Great value. This is where I migrated them to Devuan.
And don't even get me started on the "clean up behind us" arrogance of the systemd developers and fanboys (like you)
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Perhaps that's what the grandparent is talking about
Then it's not RIP if it's supported, is it? I'm pretty sure that's not what gp meant.
You dimwit, that was exactly what GP (me) meant. And it being "supported" doesn't mean it works. In Debian, rc.local fires some time in the middle of the boot process, not at the end.
The rest of your comment made me throw up a little in my mouth. I recommend not trying to make statements about things you have no knowledge of (e.g. BSD, and possibly systemd too)
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Yep. Newer is better, even Joe Sixpack knows that. Since Software itself is a comparably new concept, it has to go double for it. /s
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Ok, to counter your anecdote, there may be thousands of Linux admins that are in favor of systemd; but there are millions of Windows admins who will praise it even more than systemd fanboys praise their retarded little^Whuge project.
So by your metric, Windows servers are largely superior to Linux/systemd. Thanks for playing.
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Re: systemd, yet again.
It has caused me nothing but problems
That's not good. I hope it'll get better.
and has made Linux effectively unusable.
For you, maybe. For me, not at all. For others, maybe. For yet others, probably not. And so on.
In short, can you PLEASE stop pretending that your personal opinion is fact?
Hint: It isn't.
Have you considered Devuan? A SystemD-free Debian fork. Not that FreeBSD isn't good, it just may be an easier transition.
RAID 1 is *NOT* a backup, which I do incrementally, encrypted (with PGP), over network, every day. That's the only way to have my data safe, because even with 2 SSD, my laptop could burn or something... So no, the purpose of having RAID1 is not the same as backups, which I also do. RAID1 is for helping to keep the system up and running longer without disruption. If one hard drive fails, I know it does because I receive a mail telling me it did, and then it's up to me to decide what and when to act on it. I don't want my system to force me to do things when I don't want to. I just want RAID1 to do what it's suppose to do: make it so that my laptop continues to boot and run, even if one hard drive fails. By the way, if one SSD fails *after* the systemd boot process, no problem, my computer continues to work, as it is supposed to do.
You'd have done better to re-read the thread since you forgot what was being talked about.
You seem really confused about if your data is really important, or not really important. Make up your fucking mind, and then your problems are solved and you can take responsibility for the administration of your own damn system.
Fuck an A, man, sysadmining one box isn't actually hard.
Any other init will still boot. Other than not being able to mount /, there is no reason systemdouche needs to fail on mount errors.
numbnuts
You are truly fucktarded.
Refusing to boot a non-critcal partition is idiot.
RAID 1 is NOT a backup but you think it is.
Go back to windows it was made for dipshits like you.
numbnuts
So tell us, how does Poettering's jizz taste? Going by his posts, it must be very sour and low volume.
numbnuts
Because it is build from Debian, which is a pile of shit, even without systemdouche.
You can't make diamonds from shit.
numbnuts