On Thursday, September 15, 2011 01:43:17 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés <[email protected]> wrote: > (This mail is to keep the guys un -user in the loop about -devel). > > OK, so Joost posted his proposal to -dev:
<snipped brief discussion on gentoo-dev> The thread on gentoo-dev is not yet finished and I intend to try to get some more information. As I mentioned in my other email. > I would also like to point you guys to this article in LWN.net: > > http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/458789/3ae00c9827889929/ > > The article (the second part about systemd) closes with: > > “The overall picture was of a project that is on a roll, gaining > features and users at a fast rate. The Systemd view of the world has > not yet won over everybody, but the opposition seems to be fading. > Systemd looks like the init system of the future (and more) for a lot > of high-profile distributions.” > > The article was written by Jonathan Corbet, editor of LWN and (I think > most people would agree with me) someone who has always tried to be > objective and impartial. I'll read this later (probably tomorrow) and get back to you on this if necessary. > So, if Joost and others are willing and able to implement the > necessary bits to avoid the need for an initramfs, I salute them and > wish them luck. But the most probable outcome is this: > > * The fork/replacement will take years of man-effort: design, > implementation, debug, documentation, mainteinance. > * At the same time, the dev-approved solution of a minimal initramfs > or a dracut/genkernel generated one will be available and working. > * If the forking/replacement team manages to create a workable > fork/replacement, it will have to sell it to the Gentoo devs, and if > the initramfs solution is working properly the most rational answer > will be "no, thank you". The time needed for this is not certain as we are planning on basing it on the current udev and see what is possible. If the Gentoo-devs come up with a fool-proof solution, which is one of the possible outcomes I am trying to get to in the gentoo-dev thread, I will be happy there as well. As for the udev-fork to ever becoming mainstream, I can't say. It might not even work the way we are hoping. Only time will tell. > I'm sorry if my analysis bother some people, but it's basically what > I've been saying from the beginning. I'm glad Joost asked the > developers for their input. I think it clears the air about a lot of > things. I have no problem with your analysis and yes, the initial response from Zac was what you've been saying. I am hoping to get more information on this and I will have no problem if you keep reporting it back here. One of the reasons I asked it on Gentoo-dev is simply because I agree with some people here that this thread was starting to go in circles and no new information was being added. -- Joost
