Philipp Kern - 08.08.19, 14:48:48 CEST: > On 2019-08-08 14:43, Holger Levsen wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 02:35:13PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote: > >> And there’s the problem. If we keep with sysvinit as a baseline of > >> features provided by the init, we end up with just every init > >> script > >> having something like this: [...] > > > > it seems several people in this thread have missed the fact, that > > sysvinit in Debian is maintained well again, eg there have been 17 > > uploads of it so far in 2019, see > > https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/sysvinit/news/ > > > > (so I think the above fixes could all be made in one central place.) > > As a lot of the conflict between sysvinit and systemd was about the > philosophy. So then the question boils down to what kind of feature > development sysvinit *in Debian* is willing to do to do that. If the > answer is "we really want the shell scripts as they have been since > the beginning of time - and that is the scope of sysvinit" (which > would not be true either, I know), then we cannot have that > discussion either. > > That's also to some degree why I think a solution to this problem is > for the init diversity folks to figure out and we should not block on > that. And that seems fine given the scope they have set for > themselves.
I'd like to mention that people in the debian init diversity group not only work on sysvinit, but also on runit, elogind for example. I believe there is not need to resolve the difference in philosophy. I switched all my systems to sysvinit meanwhile. One is on OpenRC. And so far I do not miss any features and enjoy the predictability. Probably only restarting services on failure – runit / s6 provide that. thinkfan fails sometimes for example, but with Systemd I did not even notice it. I prefer when whatever manages services to be invisible and I prefer policy to be in code I can easily review as an admin of my system. So for me: No new features is actually a good thing. Software development got faster and faster and faster… but did things really get better? They for sure got more complex and more difficult to understand. I bet it again it depends on different view points. And so there is a benefit to just agree to disagree. Sysvinit does not need to become like Systemd or vice versa. Of course I do not object careful development of a feature here and there… and I am considering to switch to an init system that can restart services for my main laptop as well. Maybe runit, maybe… let's see. It has no urgent priority tough. Thanks, -- Martin