On 11/08/12 07:12, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 08/11/2012 05:53 AM, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote: >> Declaring "one area -- one chosen tool" is declaring the monopoly in the >> area. As with other monopolies, this often leads to "vendor" lock-in, >> stagnation, stopping developing the standards. Have seen examples of all >> that occasionally. >> > Exactly! And in this particular case, the "vendor" is RedHat, and > the programs are systemd and udev. If we can have an alternative, > using OpenRC and mdev, then I really welcome it! Choosing systemd > just because it *seem* to look better *now*, knowing that we have > a quite hostile upstream, *and* dismissing any other alternative, > is a very dangerous bet which I don't think Debian should do. That > is, I believe, the most important point of all this thread. > > Let's welcome OpenRC and see how it goes... This doesn't mean that > we are choosing *now* what will be the *default* init system. Just > that we are open to a new alternative. >
FYI, I just saw this: "Yes, udev on non-systemd systems is in our eyes a dead end, in case you haven't noticed it yet. I am looking forward to the day when we can drop that support entirely" - Lennart Poettering (lists.freedesktop.org) http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2012-August/006066.html http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/y3ao1/yes_udev_on_nonsystemd_systems_is_in_our_eyes_a/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
