Re: Proposal: General Resolution on Init Systems and systemd Facilities
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 10:03:35AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> My personal preference is for the project to either decide that we're
> going to use systemd facilities by default and sysvinit is going to break,
> or to decide that we're going to require standardized interfaces with the
> option for other communities to provide their own implementation of those
> interfaces and to delay adoption of the interface for a reasonable length
> of time. The second is a lot more work than the first, to be clear, but I
> think it's work we can do.
I wonder if it would make sense to have a branching policy here: either use
systemd and declare it properly, or you follow the slow path.
GNOME and systemd coordinate among themselves mostly, adding features as
required for their use cases. As long as no one outside these particular
ecosystems uses these features, we can just step aside and wait for wider
adoption.
The majority of packages we have in Debian either need no init integration
at all, or will be content with "start this at boot" and "start this at
that time", so they don't need anything beyond what is defined right now.
What's unclear right now is GTK's stance -- they seem to be interested in
using some new systemd features, which would make all GTK apps directly
dependent on systemd-as-pid1.
Simon
Reply to: