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

Re: Survey answers part 3: systemd is not portable and what this means for our ports

Thomas Goirand <zigo <at> debian.org> writes:
> You have to define what problem we are trying to solve. And this still
> hasn't been defined yet in this list. 

What for?

Seriously. There are a whole lot of features in systemd which I, for one, do
NOT want to do without any longer.

Decent process state reporting. Decent and comprehensive logging. Service
termination that works reliably. The ability to run processes in their own
namespace without jumping through hoops and spending a day debugging the
stuff. Socket activation. Udev activation. Replacing a whole heap of
somewhat-buggy sysvinit scripts.

I could go on. systemd's feature list is impressive, and so is the list of
distros which have adopted it.

Ship basic sysvinit scripts for the handful of non-Linux-kernel Debian users
if you have to, but otherwise transition to systemd, dammit. Any other
option makes no sense whatsoever. IMHO.

Among the heap of computers I own, every single one runs with systemd (even
the outdated v44 in Wheezy is better than sysvinit), and I'd rather switch
distros than going back. Seriously.

-- Matthias

Reply to: