Re: Survey answers part 3: systemd is not portable and what this means for our ports
On 07/15/2013 03:20 AM, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Jul 14, David Kalnischkies <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> But there is a difference between "not used after its done as the project
>> proofed that it is not able to deliver something more valuable" and
>> "saying midway that whatever the student does, it will be discarded".
> Whatever the student will do it cannot change the fact that OpenRC is
> still going to be a minor improvement over sysvinit and too much far
> from upstart and systemd.
> And again, this was explained clearly when the project was proposed.
>  and let's not even start discussing the wisdom of adopting a totally
> unknown init system which nobody but Gentoo uses, because the people
> who don't even get this just make me sad.
If OpenRC goes up to the shape I expect, it will have a huge advantage
over systemd and Upstart: it will not be controversial, throwing away
non-Linux ports, and taking over the whole of the system. It will just
be an improvement, and that's it.
When thinking about switching from one init system to another, it should
all come down to what objective we are trying to aim at. These haven't
been clearly defined, and I think it's a shame, because that should be
what influences our decision. Personally, the most important bit is to
get rid of the huge init scripts, and make them simple and declarative.
Best is to do it without disturbing any other package (or port). OpenRC
has the potential to do that, so it is worth exploring this path.
Calling OpenRC unkonwn is by the way stretched to say the least. Saying
that it's used only by Gentoo is simply just wrong (it has ports for