Bug#727708: Init system resolution open questions
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 01:01:51PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I think that major packages that would be considered release blockers,
> which probably includes GNOME, KDE, and Xfce, need to support the default
> Linux init system in the sense that, if they don't, I don't think we can
> I think a substantial degredation of functionality when running on an init
> system other than the Linux default would be okay for for jessie+1. For
> jessie, I think it depends greatly on how feasible making them work with
> sysvinit is (and I suspect sysvinit support would be sufficient for all
> other purposes).
I think we should move away from them target that the non-Linux ports should
build the entire archive.
FreeBSD upstream isn't a desktop OS and never will be, there're just too
many deficiencies (e.g. lack of dbus, limited hardware support, only OSS
sound drivers, limited KMS/3D support in Xorg etc. pp). So why should the
Debian port with it's minimal porters achieve what upstream doesn't deliver?
And for Hurd it's even more obvious.
All the use cases mentioned for Debian kfreebsd are server-based (e.g. pf
or NAS using ZFS). Why not focus on a useful subsection of Debian and get that
right instead of fighting an uphill battle?