Re: A few observations about systemd
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 4:00 AM, Svante Signell
<svante.signell@telia.com> wrote:
> 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 <uoti.urpala@pp1.inet.fi> 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
>> prefers"?
>
> 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
> latter :)
>
The really question is that for which group of users?
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> Archive: [🔎] 1330286407.18649.100.camel@hp.my.own.domain">http://lists.debian.org/[🔎] 1330286407.18649.100.camel@hp.my.own.domain
>
--
YunQiang Su
Reply to: