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

Re: sysvinit is still here, and here to stay for jessie (was Re: systemd is here to stay, get over it now)


Thorsten Glaser:
> A lot of Debian systems even run without dbus!
Yeah. So? systemd doesn't force you to run a dbus daemon.

> No, there just has not been any challenge that met the form and
> other requirements… and I am at a bit of loss at what to do here.
You get to do the same thing the Hurd and k*BSD people get to do –
develop viable alternatives.

I don't see *them* bitch about systemd, not here anyway; given the fact
that it won't even run on their systems (and likely never will) I'd say
they'd have more cause for doing that than you.

> Besides, it’s not that the TC made a decision. Rather, the TC was
> split, and the chairman threw in his weight. This is absolutely not
> what I’d call a project(!) decision.
It's been a few months and nobody has filed a GR yet – and IMHO the most
probable reason for *that* is that one would be very unlikely to succeed

A few people complaining about systemd does not a project decision make.
Or unmake, for that matter.

> > Can we get over this now and start making Jessie the most awesome stable 
> > release we've ever prepared together?
> To do that, it MUST work without systemd, if alone for upgrade
> scenarios.
It must work without systemd well enough to be able to cleanly reboot the
system from the GUI, after upgrading.

Anything beyond that is nice-to-have, but definitely NOT required.

> split, and the chairman threw in his weight. This is absolutely not
> what I’d call a project(!) decision.

The *project* decision happened afterwards, by force of everybody (or, as
it turns out, almost everybody) heaving a sigh of relief that, no matter
the actual decision, the continus debate would *finally* be over and we
could get on with releasing jessie instead of talking about it.

Fat chance, as it turns out.

Oh yes, and there was also the sigh of relief from people like me –
people who want Debian to have systemd, because its features are so effing
damn *useful*, and who'd rather switch distros than use upstart.


> And alone the fact that the systemd issue *continuously* pops up
> shows you that it is nowhere even near solved.

Wrong. A couple of people repeat again and again that they dislike systemd,
quite intensely, and for reasons one might consider to be non-technical – if
one were so inclined(*).

(*) … it is not always easy not to violate our CoC …

By and of itself, this says nothing whatsoever about systemd's quality.

> […] are still on the table.

However, it is NOT the rest of the project's responsibility to make
<whatever> work seamlessly without systemd.

It's yours.

An inhibit-systemd package (by whatever name) will not help you (or anybody
else for that matter) achieve that goal.

-- Matthias Urlichs

Reply to: