On 03/21/2012 05:42 PM, Thomas Hood wrote: > Technical and other merits of contending init systems have been > discussed here at some length. I think we should focus on another > question, namely, which alternative is best suited to *Debian*, taking > into consideration Debian's developer community structure (many > independent package maintainers, minimalistic policy) and the role of > Debian in relation to other distributions, most importantly Ubuntu. > > Init system foo might be technically fabulous, but if maintaining foo > in Debian requires frequent simultaneous changes to many packages then > foo might not be well suited to Debian. > > By "alternatives" I mean alternative sets of sets of supported init systems: > * sysvinit for all kernels > * Upstart for Linux; sysvinit for others > * systemd for Linux; sysvinit for others > * sysvinit and optionally Upstart for Linux; sysvinit for others > * sysvinit and optionally Upstart and optionally systemd for Linux, > sysvinit and optionally systemd for others > etc., etc., >
I really think that what's missing here is: - Improve sysvinit and make it better to fit our needs without breaking anything (eg: less scripts redundancy, parallel booting, ...). Thomas -- 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/4f6a3082.2080...@debian.org
