Re: A few observations about systemd
Le mardi 19 juillet 2011 à 13:41 -0500, Peter Samuelson a écrit :
> [Uoti Urpala]
> > IMO letting kFreeBSD block a technology like systemd (or even letting
> > it have a significant impact on the discussion about whether it's
> > desirable to introduce the technology for the main Linux case) would
> > only be justifiable if there were very solid arguments why kFreeBSD
> > is a big net win for the project, or after a vote showing significant
> > support for the port.
> IMO letting systemd block a technology like kFreeBSD (or even letting
> it have a significant impact on the discussion about whether it's
> desirable to introduce the port for Debian releases) would
> only be justifiable if there were very solid arguments why systemd is
> a big net win for the project, or after a vote showing significant
> support for the package.
You are both framing the discussion through a fallacy: that the only
choice we have is either to drop kfreebsd or to keep insserv forever.
There is no point in doing that. The only thing you are achieving is
throwing people against one another, without anything happening at the
Having concluded from this thread that 1) kfreebsd is important to
Debian and 2) systemd is important for Debian, the question cannot be
which one we choose between the two, but HOW we achieve both with the
least pain possible.
Several people have already explained that it should be possible to
write a script, working for most packages, to generate old-style init
scripts from systemd service files, allowing for a compatibility wrapper
on top of insserv for kfreebsd (until systemd is ported or a compatible
init is written for it).
.''`. Josselin Mouette
: :' :