Bill Ricker <[email protected]> writes: > Can we agree that SysV Init is ancient, and is due for at least major > reform, if not outright replacement ?
Nope. Unless you mean adapting OpenBSD's rc scripts as the major reform or re-writing in (Tom Duff's) rc or scsh. I've expanded on why that suits my preferences at length in my last email. I just don't see the need for my own uses, though I never liked sysv as well as BSD's rc. If others want something new, that's cool. > > While we can debate artistic design choices and complain about > personalities, it seems we don't have a lot of choice: if RedHat and > Ubuntu and Gentoo and Debian will all be shipping SystemD, only the > most fringe distros will keep SysV init on pid 1 or find a third path. I thought Gentoo was fully agnostic and making major efforts at allowing non-systemd (runit?) to be possible. Debian's technical committee wants to play at taking a similar line by saying patches for sysv init or upstart should not be rejected, though it sounds like bullshit perhaps or at least less than realistic. I wouldn't call Slackware fringe. Maybe that's just me. -- Mike Small [email protected] _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
