On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 03:13:54PM +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote: > El mié, 01-05-2013 a las 13:00 +0200, Fabio Erculiani escribió: > [...] > > >> The only remaining problem is about eselect-sysvinit, for this reason, > > >> I am probably going to create a new separate pkg called > > >> _sysvinit-next_, that contains all the fun stuff many developers were > > >> not allowed to commit (besides my needs, there is also the need of > > >> splitting sysvinit due to the issues reported in [4]). I am sure that > > >> a masked alternative sysvinit ebuild won't hurt anybody and will make > > >> Gentoo a bit more fun to use. > > >> > > > > > > I am unable to find exact advantage of changing init system without > > > rebooting :/, what is the advantage of booting with an init.d and > > > shutting down with a different one? > > > > No, you don't boot with A and shutdown with B. B is loaded by the > > kernel at the next boot. > > Switching init system is the only way to roll out a migration path, > > among other things I already wrote about on the eselect-sysvinit bug. > > > > Ah! OK, I misunderstood the "runtime" sense, in that case looks > interesting :D
I still don't see the advantage of eselect-sysvinit over editing your boot loader configuration and changing the init= kcl option, as I said on the bug. William
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
