Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 10:51:57AM +0000, Laurent Bercot wrote:
> Bear in mind that - this is a simplified, but descriptive enough view
> of the political landscape of the current Linux ecosystem - distribution
> maintainers are *lazy*. They already know systemd, or openrc, or
> sysvinit; they don't want to put in more effort. They don't want to have
> to significantly modify their packaging scripts to accommodate a wildly
> different format.
In their defence, I don't think any mainstream distribution makes this
kind of modifications easy. IMO it's safe to assume a new init system
means a new distribution (possibly derived from something larger).
> For instance, instead of having to provide s6-rc source definition
> directories for services, they would provide a descriptive file,
> similar to systemd unit files, that would then be automatically
> processed and turned into a set of s6-rc definition directories.
Extra layers generally make things harder to work with, not easier.
Whoever may be building something new with s6 would probably benefit
more from a reference system that's simple enough to understand
and which could be used as a base for extending into a full blown
distribution. Having examples at hand would likely matter much more
than the format of service description.
The reaction to the slew manual I'm afraid will likely be along the
lines of "that's all cool and stuff but how do I actually run this?".