Re: systemd

[Buntunub <mckisicd@gmail.com>]

John Hasler-3 wrote
> There may be packages into
> which the upstream authors have twisted Systemd dependencies
> inextricably, but that is not anything Debian can change.
> -- 
> John Hasler 

> jhasler@

> Elmwood, WI USA

And sir, that is the problem with Systemd and Debians acceptance of it as
default. Were Systemd just an Init system then there would not be the
controversy about it at all, and in fact, I don't think anyone would have a
problem with it. It purposely limits freedom of choice with dependencies. I
think this deserves some additional thought on the part of the Debian DDs if
this should be the way forward for a Distro which has carried the torch for
freedom for 20+ years.

We all understand the difficulty with maintaining alternative Init systems
in this environment, so the real question is, IF Debian DDs call a vote and
move away from the decision to adopt Systemd as default, OR decide to fully
support alternative Init systems, can they do so? Will more volunteers be
needed to keep a working version of SysV with dependency resolution?



--
View this message in context: http://debian.2.n7.nabble.com/systemd-tp3379740p3379944.html
Sent from the Debian User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.