Re: A few observations about systemd
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.
--
Jon Dowland
Reply to: