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

Re: Bug#684396: ITP: openrc -- alternative boot mechanism that manages the services, startup and shutdown of a host

2012/8/31 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.

Yeah, one init system, one kernel, one libc, one distribution, one
window manager, one OS. Looks like a windows-way. :)
"640kb ought to be enough for anybody." :)

>> 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.

Not sure I understand you here.

>> even 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?

Sure. I would also like to see a `kitten-wallpapers` package,
if it's free (e.g. CC-BY-SA) of course.

>> 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
> implementation.

Not necessary. It's ITP, not RFP. That may mean that there would be someone
who will send patches to other maintainers to fix their init scripts, that
do not obey debian standards. If they do obey standards but still don't
work under openrc then it's a bug either in debian standard or in openrc,
and one of them should be fixed anyway.

> 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.

Hm, I use linux exactly because it's about choice. It allows me to do things
that no other system does. In linux I can choose those things that suit me
and use them. POSIX allows me to choose kernel and libc. XDG and X11 allows
me to choose desktop environment. HTTP RFC allows me to choose the best
webserver and best browser. Lots of programs in repository allows be to
choose the best program that suits me. If I still miss some feature that I'd
chose, GPL allows me to patch the sources and get the feature I've chosen.

Do you use Linux? Why? Because it's cheap?

Linux is still not about choice? Then let's make it be about choice!

> 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.

So, if user needs to see something in debian repository then being
universal means having it in repository. :)

> Adding more choice always brings more bugs, but it does not,
> by far, always answer to more user needs.

Agree. That's #2 of my 3 points. If nobody really needs it, meaning,
if nobody asked for it, and it does not make anyone happy, there's
no need to spend time on it. Does openrc make anyone happy?

But if it has some advantages over existing systems, it at least deserves
the right to be chosen by those who needs those advantages.

> One good init system can answer all our needs, while four bad ones will
> certainly not.

What if that good init system is openrc?


Reply to: