Re: A few observations about systemd
Jon Dowland <firstname.lastname@example.org> schrieb:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 08:12:04AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> Developing for Linux-only is fine, but Lennart has explicitly said that
>> he wouldn’t remotely consider accepting portability patches, which goes
>> further than any other piece of free software I had to deal with.
> Oh. That's worse than I thought.
>> We need one and only one init system in Debian. (Those considering
>> maintaining several init systems in parallel do not see how stupid,
>> bloated and error-prone it would be to require all daemon maintainers to
>> maintain more init scripts than they do now.) I’d like to see systemd as
>> that one init system, but this challenges the future of kfreebsd.
> I've just written pretty much the opposite in my last message to the thread,
> however: it's my opinion that supporting kfreebsd et al should be done with the
> minimum impact on the Linux Debian distribution. So, pre-supposing systemd, I
> see three options:
> 1. carry portability patches against systemd locally
> 2. support multiple init systems
> 3. drop kfreebsd (and HURD and others)
> I thought 2. would be more likely than 1. (and fairer on Tolleg!) since I
> expect there will be people with no interest in kfreebsd/HURD that nevertheless
> would like init system choice; however I'm not one of those people, and I'm
> increasingly of the opinion that choice for choices sake harms us.
There're other blockers beside systemd to KFreeBSD being a full Debian port,
e.g. the lack of KMS in Xorg. Even the guy who gave a talk von FreeBSD at
last year's DebConf didn't use FreeBSD on his desktop.