Bug#727708: Vote sysvinit 4 jessie
Michael Gilbert <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
>> Michael Gilbert writes:
>>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
>>>> So all deferring for another cycle does is leave Debian with annoying
>>>> cumbersome init scripts and unsolvable race conditions for another cycle.
>>> Which have already been solved for a long time now.
>> No, they haven't. Try eg. various combinations of layering md-raid,
>> cryptsetup, lvm and btrfs on top of each other. If you feel particularly
>> adventurous, add some storage devices that take minutes to initialize or
>> need a working network connection (disclaimer: I haven't personally
>> tried the latter, but I'm pretty sure it's not going to make things work
> For use cases like this where sysvinit is insufficient, the user can
> use init-select or whatever to use a newer init that does handle this
You are not making sense to me. You claimed that race conditions and
bugs in sysvinit have been solved. They have not been solved. So now you
are claiming that *because better init systems exist*, these bugs do not
matter and we should stick with sysvinit?
End of discussion for me here.
Encrypted emails preferred.
PGP fingerprint: 5B93 61F8 4EA2 E279 ABF6 02CF A9AD B7F8 AE4E 425C
»Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.«