Re: Bug#684396: ITP: openrc -- alternative boot mechanism that manages the services, startup and shutdown of a host
Le vendredi 31 août 2012 à 04:18 +0300, Serge a écrit :
> 2012/8/10 Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Because being able to choose between alternatives for core features such
> > as the init system only brings more bugs and no added value.
> Sorry, I don't understand this point.
> If it's about just adding more bugs without bringing anything good
> with it — sure, it's a bad idea.
It is exactly what init system multiplication is about.
> But as long as:
> 1. It breaks nothing for existing installations (i.e. does not
> change defaults,
That is already far-stretched.
> does not break existing custom scripts,
This is even more far-stretched.
> is not installed by default)
> 2. It has something, that is not provided by other packages,
> meaning, it makes someone happy. (!)
Kitten pictures make me happy. Can we ship them too?
> 3. There's someone willing to maintain it and fix the bugs.
That means there is someone who will pester other maintainers to “fix”
their init scripts so that they work with another half-baked init
> PS: IMHO, saying things like "Linux is not about choice" and
> "Debian is not about being universal" just scares maintainers
> and users away from debian, and brings nothing good instead.
If you’re scared by hearing that Linux is not about choice, let me say
it again: Linux is not about choice. Not about choice. Choice is not
inherently good. Linux is not about choice. Booh.
As for Debian not being universal, this is certainly not my saying. But
toy ports and toy init systems are part of what makes Debian less
universal: being the universal OS doesn’t mean accepting every piece of
shit, it means being able to answer every user need. Adding more choice
always brings more bugs, but it does not, by far, always answer to more
One good init system can answer all our needs, while four bad ones will
.''`. Josselin Mouette
: :' :