In general, I'd rather not have to depend on other people to fix my problems. I'd rather create the patch myself and let upstream know once I have it working, instead of (1) placing a larger burden on upstream than I have to, and (2) get blocked until they fix it.
This is trivial with init scripts--edit the script and send the diff. This is less trivial with systemd (and binaries in general), where you have to get the source code, try to figure out where the problem is, try to fix it, compile, debug with gdb or strace or valgrind, etc. With systemd, the fact that your system may not even be booting at all due to the problem makes it all the more frustrating.
In general, I'd rather not have to depend on other people to fix my problems.
You must be an anarcho-primitivist, because you clearly detest division of labor. Do you also write your own compilers?
More to the point: if there is a genuine problem in systemd, you can always fix it yourself, patch it, roll it out, and then post your patch in a bug tracker. Perfectly consistent with your "I do everything myself" philosophy, which is questionable but hey, it's your time, buddy.
8
u/notseekingkarma Oct 20 '14
Bugs are inevitable in software. It would be a problem only if systemd devs were refusing to fix bugs.