On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 12:54:44 Chris Bannister wrote: > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 07:11:03PM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > On Lu, 22 sep 14, 21:17:28, Marty wrote: > > > 1) The goal is "modular Debian." Multi-init is the means to achieve > > > it. Being tied to one init system is what caused Debian’s problems, > > > and the replacement did not fix it. A modular system has to support > > > all init systems, including systemd, clones and custom inits. > > > > While you're at it how about also making sure we can have a dietlibc or > > uClibc version of Debian? After all, depending on glibc is also not very > > good. Oh, and don't forget about udev and X.Org. There is already work > > in progress trying to compile Debian with something other than GCC, so > > you don't need to worry about that. > > > > Yes this is a joke, but only in part. It's very interesting how suddenly > > people are so worried about Debian being tied to one piece of software, > > while this has been happening all along. > > I just had a look and didn't realise how closely Debian is reliant on the > C language! Surely, this can't be good!
The entire kernel is written in C. A language is just a tool. That is like saying "The sink was installed with a wrench! Surely, this can't be good!" -- Mike McGinn KD2CNU Be happy that brainfarts don't smell. No electrons were harmed in sending this message, some were inconvenienced. ** Registered Linux User 377849 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: https://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
