Linux is terribly balkanized what with all the competing distros. There are no standards. This is one reason why Linux has not taken off on the desktop outside of tech circles.
systemd. It violates almost every *nix tenet out there, especially "a program should do one thing well". It's has a few benefits, but the negatives outweigh these, namely more and more programs outside of the base system now require systemd. This should never be. I and millions of others agree that an init system should be able to be tweaked as text files. Not happening now. The logs are stored as binaries when they should be plain text. Debugging is more difficult. A program should do one thing well. Full stop. There is always BSD and Slackware, and I don't think Slackware will adopt systemd, as their user base doesn't want it. Slackware is the oldest currently-developed Linux distro out there and the vast majority of users want it to remain true to its roots while still advancing.
There is also GNU Shepherd[1] on GuixSD[2], a declarative init system, without systemd's million-plus lines of shitty code[3] and massive scope creep into everything that you can (but probably don't need or want to) do on a computer.
Quite. Especially now with their hideous CoC. That thing is straight out of the pits of PC hell. Many people think Linus will never again assume command now that he's stepped down for his so-called infractions. Gone now is the merit-based stuff and now it's all based on PC garbage. I miss the old days of IT, especially now.
BSD user here. Of course there is porting occurring, but this is the nature of open source, is it not? Oftentimes, the BSD devs will take whatever hardware specs they can get and code something from that. OpenBSD frequently writes drivers that are orders of magnitude smaller than comparable Linux drivers, while getting the same functionality. NVIDIA drivers are but one example. Some hardware vendors are generous with hardware specs for OSS, most are not. OpenBSD, as an example, will not have any GPL'd code in the base OS, as it's not truly free. Ports are another issue.
> will not have any GPL'd code in the base OS, as it's not truly free
That's a disingenuous way to put it. The GPL is a free software license. It is "free" as in libre by all common definitions of "free" in regards to software.
The GPL is not compatible with the BSD dev's preferred license, which is much more likely the reason they avoid using such code.
By all conventional definitions, the BSD and GPL licenses are "truly free [software licenses]."
You're welcome to argue that the BSD license is better (because, for example, it lets sony create derivative playstation OSs without providing that source code to their users, ensuring their users have less freedom than if it were linux) or that the GPL is better (because it would prevent the previous), but they're both free licenses.
I have refused to go into management precisely to avoid what you are experiencing. My wages have somewhat stagnated because of this, and most of my working acquaintances have moved up, but they are miserable in comparison.
Yes, they make more, in some cases much more, but after being in IT for over 20 years, I desire my "8-4 M-F no work nights/no work weekends" life more than I do a little extra coin. I go home and do zero work save things for the wife and kids, which are more akin to fun projects. I have told my boss more than once that I have a union mentality towards work. I work only during working hours. I demand a life/work balance and would happily leave should this become otherwise. I tell young IT people all the time to not allow themselves to be burned out. Work your day job and go home to your girlfriend/wife and enjoy your down time. When I'm home, I don't do any IT work other than tinker with Raspberry Pis or projects with my kids.
You cannot hit the rewind button if you have a family. Your family will not remember you for your long work schedule (hell, they may not even remember you), rather you will be remembered for the quality time. I have told myself that I want my kids to remember our time together as one big, fun on-going series of projects where we learn things together and have fun doing it.
To each is own, for sure. I have the exact opposite philosophy. I would rather my kids see me as someone who is trying to achieve something big. After a while, they have their own interests and don’t want to do projects with you anyway.
How old are your kids? A word of advice: your kids will never be impressed by what you do, to them you could be POTUS and it would just be the normal set point for them. What they will remember is whether you cared more about your work than you did them.
Completely disagree. Kids need attention from their parents but a lot less that you might think. Best way to raise them is by example. Sure, if you never spend time with them that’s bad, but you don’t need to spend 5 hours every night with them either.
You're putting words in my mouth, I was talking about showing interest, you're talking about "5 hours a night". I repeat the question: how old are your kids?
Fair comment. By projects, that is not limited to strictly IT. My kids may not choose IT as a career, but they will certainly understand how to do basic coding, build a computer, understand the inner working, etc., for if nothing else, they understand cause and effect and that they are capable of being makers should they choose.
I take my kids fishing and hunting, for example, things they thoroughly enjoy. We go to the cinema, bookstore to get hands on reading time, they have learned how to budget for groceries, gas, fun money, etc. I could do none of this were I chained to my desk at work pounding out code in Visual Studio.
Be that as may be, I have a right to a life/work balance. My own father worked himself into an early grave at 60. I lived with his being chained to his job. I swore I would never do it.
I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm warning you of some of the possible weaknesses in your argument that you're in a protected, safe place. And I do this only because I've made the same assumptions a couple of times and paid the price for not figuring it out sooner.
Linux is terribly balkanized what with all the competing distros. There are no standards. This is one reason why Linux has not taken off on the desktop outside of tech circles.
systemd. It violates almost every *nix tenet out there, especially "a program should do one thing well". It's has a few benefits, but the negatives outweigh these, namely more and more programs outside of the base system now require systemd. This should never be. I and millions of others agree that an init system should be able to be tweaked as text files. Not happening now. The logs are stored as binaries when they should be plain text. Debugging is more difficult. A program should do one thing well. Full stop. There is always BSD and Slackware, and I don't think Slackware will adopt systemd, as their user base doesn't want it. Slackware is the oldest currently-developed Linux distro out there and the vast majority of users want it to remain true to its roots while still advancing.