Re: Proposal: switch init system to systemd or upstart
Let the war begin... ;)
On Fri, 2013-10-25 at 14:29 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> - stable support for advanced boot/SAN environments
How far is this:
really supported now?
> - things like gnome become easier to package
An other things become more difficult or even impossible to package
(what about the BSD flavours, Hurd, etc. pp.)
> - some work to do (how much depends on the choice and on the details.
> but keeping sysvinit on life support is not free either)
- I know that at least dm-crypt support does not work for all
relevant/reasonable usages of dmcrypt (i.e. key-scripts) yet.
- It's far more complex than traditional sysvinit, which can also mean
problems in the end.
> Since the init system strongly shapes many other packages, there has to
> be only one and no other supported options.
Well... has there?
I think it's good to have one that MUST be supported, but why not more?
In principle I tend towards systemd, which seems more powerful and
likely to be supported by more people in the end.
upstart is rather a Canonical thingy and it seems rather unclear where
Canonical is really heading towards (just look at developments like