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

Re: Debian systemd survey

On 22/05/13 at 05:50 +0300, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > I went through the various init systems threads again during the last
> > few days. My understanding of the consensus so far is the following:
> > 
> > - Both systemd and upstart bring many useful features, and are a
> >   clear improvement over sysvinit.
> Yes, both are an improvement over sysvinit.
> >  It is not clear which one of systemd
> >   or upstart is the best on the technical level. Many of the differences
> >   have grounds in differences of philosophy, which can easily be seen as
> >   pros or cons.
> I think this is false, both as a description of fact and as a
> description of claimed consensus view. Systemd has advanced
> significantly further than upstart, and this is more a technical reality
> than a matter of opinion like something such as preferred GUI behavior;
> this is better compared to whether Linux or MINIX was a more promising
> platform for future development in the 1990s. There is a lack of
> consensus, rather than a consensus that it's a matter of opinion or
> philosophy with no clear technical arguments.

We can argue for a long time about which one is technically better.
The result of that discussion does not matter much (since you are invoking
Linux vs MINIX, look at Hurd vs Linux).

If I were you, I would be very worried about the risk that the decision
will be taken not by looking at which one is the best, but by looking at
which one is de-facto supported in Debian. In that area, systemd is very
late, since:
- AFAIK nobody has started the effort to document things in policy
- there are 300+ upstart job files ready to be imported from Ubuntu

So, please work on:
- policy support
- outlining how systemd and sysvinit can properly co-exist in the archive
  (this is required in any case for the duration of the transition)
- outlining how the transition could be achieved, eased, and tracked


Reply to: