Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Joshua Brindle <method@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Init replacement
Date: Fri, 02 May 2003 20:37:33
1 >On Fri, May 02, 2003 at 10:08:03AM -0700, Jon Kent wrote:
2 >> I must be honest and say that the Gentoo init system
3 >> is not easiest in the world, I prefer the old
4 >> rcX.d/Sxx[name] approach myself as its simple, but I'd
5 >> still prefer the current approach over the proposed
6 >> approach.
7 >
8 >It's not a proposal to change Gentoo's default init-system (or at least I
9 >hope so). I fully support the OP with his work because one can never know
10 >what it provides untill it's available.
11 >
12 >So, keep up the development.
13 >
15 I agree. Everyone here should know very well that gentoo is about
16 choices. We provide the user with choices every opportunity we have,
17 though some places it's difficult to do. When a choice presents itself
18 don't scrutinize it, we do not ever attempt to lock users into a single
19 solution, and we make every attempt to provide as many choices as possible.
21 On the subject of init scripts, I recall having a conversation with seemant
22 about this init system which used tree based dependancies and could start
23 init scripts simaltaeneously if their dependancy trees didn't collide (for faster
24 bootups), does this solution provide this? we'd really like to get something
25 that will take some of the overhead out of the init system...
29 Joshua Brindle
31 --
32 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Init replacement Martin Schlemmer <azarah@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] Init replacement George Shapovalov <george@g.o>