On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 17:25 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 28 février 2012 à 14:36 +0000, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> > It's not just kFreeBSD. Accepting systemd, in the current state,
> > means permanently tying ourselves to the Linux kernel.
> >
> > The Linux kernel project has some serious and ongoing structural
> > problems and I think it's very important that as a project we keep our
> > options open.
>
> I think this is a red herring. What systemd achieves is also
> standardisation for daemon descriptions and the startup system. I don’t
> have a single doubt that, should an realistic alternative to Linux
> emerge, it would come with an init system allowing to re-use them with
> minor changes. This is one of the biggest advantages of using a
> descriptive system.
There are alternatives to systemd and upstart available: runit and GNU
DMD ("Daemon managing Daemons") as well as links to other OS init systems at
http://smarden.org/runit/. The DMD looks a little unmaintained though,
latest release in 2003, but at least this is a GNU project...
--
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/1330448348.2962.117.ca...@s1499.it.kth.se
