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

[Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@err.no>]

]] The Wanderer 

> If someone implementing a new alternative wanted to retain the other
> tools with which systemd integrates, that person would have to match
> their interfaces, which might limit the functionality the new
> alternative could be able to provide - much as having to match the
> sysvinit interfaces would seem to limit the functionality systemd can
> provide.

systemd isn't limited by sysvinit interfaces in what kind of interfaces
it can implement.  It just means a subset of the functionality is
supported for sysvinit scripts.  (No socket activation to take an
obvious example.)

The sysvinit support is actually optional and can be compiled out.

As for the concerns that a new tool would require a lot of work if it
were to replace systemd, well, yes, it would.  Systemd does cover a lot
of ground and if you want to feature match/feature exceed it everywhere,
that's not an easy task.  Zbigniew pointed out some bits that can be
broken out piecemeal and used independently, though.

-- 
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are