Re: Technical committee acting in gross violation of the Debian constitution
>>>>> Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org> writes:
[…]
> Desktops (not only GNOME) use a very tiny bit of systemd, interfaces
> that could be provided elsewhere.
Is that “use” as in “if available” or is that actually “require
and be sure to die unless provided”?
(Please forgive my ignorance here, – my “desktop” runs Openbox
ever since I’ve switched off TWM c. 2008, and I’m pretty sure
that Openbox does not “use” Systemd or any related services.)
> The real purpose of systemd is to provide a modern init system.
I believe that the word “init” is misleading at best in this
context.
The SysVinit-based system traditionally used in Debian was
indeed /mostly/ concerned with bringing the system up – that is,
“initing” the system. On the contrary, Systemd seems to try to
also encompass monitoring, time synchronization, user sessions,
and, I presume, a load of other tasks.
If anything, it seems to deserve something like Master Control
Program for its name, – not something as mundane as an “init
system.”
--
FSF associate member #7257 http://boycottsystemd.org/ … 3013 B6A0 230E 334A
Reply to: