On May 02, Sven Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Though I agree that we should clean up the init system while we enable > usage of newer, better, faster init systems, I don't think that we can > remove much yet. For a while to come, many system administrators (think > servers) will like to stay with the old faithful, long tested sysvinit. Do we need to care? Ubuntu switched to upstart and I have not noticed anybody complaining.
> That being said, a lot of cleanup could be done while we move to > script-generated (from meta-information, script snippets and templates) > init scripts. This would introduce a lot of complexity. Complexity is bad, and needs to be weigthed about the benefits. What are the benefits of supporting many init system schemes? Is there a middle ground which allows a compromise? -- ciao, Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ initscripts-ng-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/initscripts-ng-devel
