Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Aug 2009, Andreas Barth wrote:
>> We should definitly continue to support oldstyle booting, at least for
>> the time being.
>
> Until what? Missing boot-time dependencies were the only problem that had
> to be adressed to fix boot sequence ordering.
>
> Sure administrators will have to learn tweaking init scripts dependencies
> instead of tweaking numbers but one always has something to learn when
> upgrading to a newer version.
And if they don't want to switch? Where is the choice to choose the default you
prefer?
>>> I think the missing point here is that insserv is just one of the ways to
>>> fix the problem of having to guess a correct start number, among many
>>> others; and any system that doesn't implement that is actually a
>>> regression. There are other tools similar to insserv that also do
>>> dependency-based booting (but AFAIK none of them are in Debian).
>> So you are telling us here that anyone who depends on the 20+ years
>> working method of ordering boot with decimal numbers is using a
>> regression?
>
> They are relying on an inferior system and the fact that they are used to
> it doesn't change anything on its inferior design.
No, decimal numbers are the superior design here as they just work without any
magic. One of the reasons I migrated away from SuSE long time ago was the mess
called insserv...
--
Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer
GPG Fingerprints: 06C8 C9A2 EAAD E37E 5B2C BE93 067A AD04 C93B FF79
ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
