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

Re: upstart: please update to latest upstream version

* Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@err.no> [120223 22:21]:
> ]] "Bernhard R. Link"
> Your shell is most likely implemented in C, but it's not like you sit
> down and have to debug it every other day.  Why do you assume that you
> need to do so just because policy is encoded in .ini-like files instead
> of shell scripts?

Because shell is general purpose (and well known) enough that you can
modify it sensibly. In the long run systemd init support might grow its
own language to be just another shell, but I guess until then of the
typical quick-hack constructs like addings some echos, adding some
cleaning code before, conditionally starting stuff, or multiple times
until some condition is reached, with some filedescriptors redirected,
with a strace or ltrace and things like that will not all possible in
a way one can easily do.

> > I've no problem with Debian supporting multiple init systems. But if
> > someone claims maintaince costs are too high for that, that is in my
> > eyes a reason against supporting systemd, not for only having it.
> Systemd is already in Debian, works for quite some people does not
> impose any maintenance burden on people who don't use it.  I really
> don't see why you keep advocating removing it.

Let me try to rephrase it, as I seem to have failed to formulate it
understandable the first two times:

What I try to say is "If there can only be one, then this should not
be systemd. So if Debian shall have systemd, it should support multiple
init systems."

        Bernhard R. Link

Reply to: