[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#727708: Thoughts on Init System Debate

On 21 Jan 2014 04:57, "Steve Langasek" <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 07:09:51PM -0800, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> > I would add the very presence of the "mountall" tool to this
> > list. Lennart has described the issues with mountall in
> > https://plus.google.com/u/0/+LennartPoetteringTheOneAndOnly/posts/ip8e1DqJdxT,
> > and apparently the upstart developers have been aware them as well since
> > the very beginning (at least since Ubuntu 8.04)
> I will not respond to this except to say that I do not agree with Lennart's
> characterization of mountall as evidence that upstart's model is incorrect.

Given Scott James Remnant's agreement with Lennart (in a comment on https://plus.google.com/+KaySievers/posts/C3chC26khpq, around 1UTC on Jan 21st)...

"Hindsight certainly lends a different perspective, and I'd be the first person to say that Upstart doesn't work as intended. +Lennart Poettering makes a great point about mountall in a recent post, it was written because Upstart couldn't do the complex filesystem cases it was designed to be able to do; and I was very aware even at the time that was a failure that would need to be addressed."

...it seems that further discussion of these design issues might be a good idea.

At the least, there should be some progress on the Upstart bug tracker indicating the shape of a solution for the mountall and The "and/or" bugs (and any other design issues).


Reply to: