Re: A few observations about systemd
On Sun, 2012-02-26 at 21:03 +0200, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-02-26 at 17:36 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > Uoti Urpala <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> I don't think it's an accident that this discussion came up in
> the context of kFreeBSD. Extra hardware architectures typically require
> a lot less effort than extra software platforms. I think it is quite
> realistic to support extra hardware architectures without adding undue
> burden on people not using them. It's a lot less realistic or reasonable
> in the kFreeBSD case.
Of course supporting additional hardware architectures under Linux is
simpler than supporting other software platforms. However, the main issue is:w hy
does Debian exist and who is Debian aiming their releases for. This is
definitely a policy decision to make.
> > > It's definitely arrogant for users of other operating systems to try to
> > > obstruct people from using better technology on Linux. It's not like
> > > there would be anything equaling the quality of systemd that would run
> > > on BSD. It's not your place to say that people shouldn't get to use it
> > > on Linux, or that Linux users should have to work on BSD support to be
> > > allowed to use it now.
> > It is equaly arrogant to say that people must use it on Linux and screw
> > BSD users.
> You see no difference between "group A chooses to use what's good for
> group A" and "small group B tells group A that they must use what B
Of course group A can choose what's good for group A. But there are
consequences of doing that for Debian as a whole. And what are your
alternatives for group A, systemd and upstart seems to be equally
screwed, and not providing much improvement compared to sysvinit. For
example, where is your rescue shell if something goes wrong?
> There's no obligation for Linux users to keep supporting BSD, any more
> than there's an obligation to support Linux kernel version 1, MSWindows
> or OS/2. Yes, there are still users asking for OS/2 support too.
The main question is: For who's interest should Debian exist, the
upstream authors, the Debian maintainers or the users? My vote is on the