Jonas Smedegaard <[email protected]> writes:
> Quoting Nikolaus Rath (2014-10-19 20:21:59)
>> Ian Jackson <[email protected]> writes:
>>> David Weinehall writes ("Re: Alternative proposal: support for alternative
>>> init systems is desirable but not mandatory"):
>>>> OK, so packaging uselessd (thus providing another init system that
>>>> provides -- most of -- the systemd interfaces) would solve all your
>>>> worries?
>>>
>>> This resolution will be interpreted by humans, specifically
>>> individual maintainers, the TC, and the release team - not by robots.
>>
>> Presumably some maintainers would consider uselessd an alternate init
>> system - and others will not. In that case the GR seems have achieved
>> effectively nothing.
>
> If there was a secret agenda e.g. to annoy systemd then you are right
> that such trick that you now thought up would mean that this GR was a
> waste of time.
I just don't understand why you consider uselessd a "trick" that I came
up with (leaving alone the fact that David brought it up here, and that
yet another guy started the project).
Best,
-Nikolaus
--
GPG encrypted emails preferred. Key id: 0xD113FCAC3C4E599F
Fingerprint: ED31 791B 2C5C 1613 AF38 8B8A D113 FCAC 3C4E 599F
»Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.«
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
