Le vendredi 24 février 2012 à 10:45 +0000, Lars Wirzenius a écrit : > Should we allow kFreeBSD and Hurd (and, possibly, other kernels in > the future), which do not support the features required by systemd > and upstart, allow us to get away from sysvinit and start using an > event based init system? > > * If we stick to sysvinit, we lose the benefits of event based init. > * If we support sysvinit and at least one of upstart and systemd, > we make a bunch of extra work for every package that needs init > integration. > * If we support only systemd or upstart, then we effectively lose > non-Linux kernels.
There is another option here. We make a project-wide decision of which init system to use for Linux (systemd or upstart). And we write a compatibility layer for non-Linux systems, that generates sysvinit-compatible scripts based on systemd services or upstart jobs. This way we still generate some extra work, but only for packages too complex to be supported by the compatibility layer - packages that are likely to already have OS-specific scripts anyway. All other daemons can migrate to a simpler design, and for Linux we can fully rely on new features. Of course the hard part is to make the initial decision to switch to a given init system; this is the kind of things Debian is very bad at. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette : :' : `. `' `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1330081841.3297.1691.camel@pi0307572
