Re: systemd bug closed - next steps?
On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 12:54:44 Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 07:11:03PM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > On Lu, 22 sep 14, 21:17:28, Marty wrote:
> > > 1) The goal is "modular Debian." Multi-init is the means to achieve
> > > it. Being tied to one init system is what caused Debian’s problems,
> > > and the replacement did not fix it. A modular system has to support
> > > all init systems, including systemd, clones and custom inits.
> >
> > While you're at it how about also making sure we can have a dietlibc or
> > uClibc version of Debian? After all, depending on glibc is also not very
> > good. Oh, and don't forget about udev and X.Org. There is already work
> > in progress trying to compile Debian with something other than GCC, so
> > you don't need to worry about that.
> >
> > Yes this is a joke, but only in part. It's very interesting how suddenly
> > people are so worried about Debian being tied to one piece of software,
> > while this has been happening all along.
>
> I just had a look and didn't realise how closely Debian is reliant on the
> C language! Surely, this can't be good!
The entire kernel is written in C. A language is just a tool. That is like
saying "The sink was installed with a wrench! Surely, this can't be good!"
--
Mike McGinn KD2CNU
Be happy that brainfarts don't smell.
No electrons were harmed in sending this message, some were inconvenienced.
** Registered Linux User 377849
Reply to: