Re: Survey answers part 3: systemd is not portable and what this means for our ports
On 07/20/2013 12:43 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 07/19/2013 05:43 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> We try to have technical reasoning, which is (one of) the reason this
>> list exists. This has nothing to do with voting.
>
> If we actually did, the choice would have already been made for systemd
> long time ago.
For many reasons, the choice isn't that easy.
> It has been explained
> to you by many people before that OpenRC isn't fit for the purpose at
> all and I really don't think upstart will meet the criteria either.
The problem isn't that OpenRC isn't fit. The problem is that *NONE* of
the projects are fitting *ALL* of our requirements. All of the 3
solutions have problems. And this is probably what we should focus on:
make it so that at least one of the projects becomes a perfect fit.
The main issue there is with Systemd, is that it doesn't seem like we
may have a chance to make it evolve the way we need (for example, make
it compatible with non-Linux ports). I believe it is possible to enhance
OpenRC, which is why I worked on it. Maybe it can be possible to do that
with Upstart as well (though I never heard about anyone working on a
non-Linux port of Upstart yet).
>>> ...but it turns out that according to your
>>> line of arguments, Debian is primarily made to fuel the egos
>>> of its developers.
>>
>> Now you are crossing the line.
>
> No, I am not.
When talking about egos, you are.
> How often do I have to read people claiming that systemd
> is a bad project because they don't like their upstream authors?
Again, this was *not* my point.
>> 1/ Don't put words in my mouth which I never used.
>> 2/ Try to write more useful things. Doing personal attacks doesn't help.
>
> Says the guy who posted this to back up his chain of arguments:
>
>> http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Talk:Comparison_of_init_systems
I posted this to show OpenRC does more than just enhancing the init.d
scripts, which Steeve claimed. You are the one who took on the "hostile
upstream" part of the page, when this wasn't part of my argumentation at
all. Also, you can't make me responsible for a page which I didn't
write, or for the fact that many people think this way about Systemd
upstream. So I stand by point point 1 and 2 above.
This goes nowhere again...
Thomas
Reply to: