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

Re: Init system deba{te|cle}



Le 02.11.2013 13:09, Tom H a écrit :
On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 1:42 AM, <berenger.morel@neutralite.org> wrote: 
Le 01.11.2013 20:01, Tom H a écrit :
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 8:58 PM, <berenger.morel@neutralite.org> wrote: 
Le 31.10.2013 21:06, André Nunes Batista a écrit :

On Wed, 2013-10-30 at 14:22 +0000, Tom H wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 8:55 PM, John <JohnRChamplin@wowway.com> wrote:
Could someone who has been following the giant fuss on -devel over 
init systems explain why there's such a sense of dire urgency?
Is it provoked by systemd's effort to be adopted having at least found a home with gnome, made urgent by gnome's status as our default?
Although this isn't the first debian-devel systemd-slugfest, there's more of a sense of urgency and finality this time because GNOME 3.8 depends on logind, and, other than on Ubuntu for systemd <=204, that 
means that GNOME 3.8 depends on systemd-as-pid-1.


And does one really needs Gnome? Based on the level of user
dissatisfaction I'd say Gnome shouldn't interfere with boot process. Especially one that tries to bundle everything... maybe gnome-devs are 
trying hard to address smarts, tablets and gadgets only?
That's not gnome which changes the boot process. It's systemd. It simply 
happens that gnome depends on systemd in Debian build.
Since AFAIK gnome is still available on platforms not based on linux kernel, unlike systemd, I really think that it's gnome maintainer's 
choice to have this hard dependency.
If it's the Debian's GNOME maintainers' choice, how come GNOME depends 
on systemd in Gentoo?
It seems I was wrong, but if I were not, then, it could be because it's 
simpler with that choice.
As I said up-thread, it's a question of decoupling logind from systemd. 

The Gentoo GNOME developers decided that it was simpler for them not
to do so.

Given its attachment to upstart, Ubuntu must be planning to keep on
doing so; but Lennart and co might make it increasingly difficult (not 
necessarily - and most likely not - through malice!) so it may not be
the best long-term strategy.


Yes, I agree on the wrong long-term strategy.
Now, I wonder. Gnome was said portable, am I wrong? If they now have a hard dependency on systemd, they can no longer be considered portable, since systemd is itself only targeting linux kernels (and this is fine, since they do not claim to be portable)?
Reply to: