Re: Dropping upstart jobs (or not)
On Sat, Jun 04, 2016 at 06:49:37PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl> writes:
>
> > This says only what is the default.
>
> > Most users don't even know what's the difference. Even worse, if they
> > get hit by one of many of systemd's bugs, they'll just curse and either
> > accept lossage or consider changing distributions rather than
> > investigate the cause.
>
> So you're volunteering to adopt upstart and package and maintain it in
> Debian? If not, I'm not sure how this is relevant to the thread. Maybe
> I'm just missing the implications of your position for whether or not to
> maintain upstart configuration in packages despite the fact that there's
> no upstart package in Debian. If so, could you spell that out for those
> of us who didn't figure it out?
I don't understand why did you read my answer this way. I responded to
Marco d'Itri's claim that systemd is the sole winner, based on popcon data.
All I meant was that popcon is mostly worthless when comparing a default
option to non-defaults (the only meaningful thing you can tell is when an
option has zero or near-zero popcon), as most users either don't care or
don't know.
As for upstart -- I don't care for it, never intentionally used it, my only
interaction with it was unpleasant (breaks daemons in chroots just like
systemd does), and I don't volunteer to maintain it. On the other hand,
I did a few NMUs to insserv and openrc, although that's just a tiny drop
compared to the amount of work that needs to be done.
Meow!
--
An imaginary friend squared is a real enemy.
Reply to: