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

Re: Tentative summary of the amendments

On 24 October 2014 15:40, Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> wrote:
> What makes the systemd case so drastically different that those who care
> about alternative init systems cannot follow the same procedure?

The key difference is that until this year all packages worked on all
init systems (as in you could start any service or application with
any init system as PID 1, even with "init=/bin/sh").

The fact that the regression is introduced by an architectural
decision of systemd developers to tightly integrate system level
services into the init system (and not by a decision in Debian) causes
the feeling of loss of control. Then asking others to implement
init-system-neutral versions of systemd-invented services just to keep
using software that used to work before is ... raising some hackles.
Best regards,
    Aigars Mahinovs        mailto:aigarius@debian.org
 | .''`.    Debian GNU/Linux (http://www.debian.org)            |
 | : :' :   Latvian Open Source Assoc. (http://www.laka.lv)     |
 | `. `'    Linux Administration and Free Software Consulting   |
 |   `-                                 (http://www.aiteki.com) |

Reply to: