| 1 |
On 06/03/2013 02:37 AM, Walter Dnes wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 12:35:29AM +0200, Luca Barbato wrote |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> - eselect init will be opt-in ***FOR THE TIME BEING***, people can |
| 5 |
>> be left on their own tools if the want it |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> This statement should bring the same reaction as the posting that udev |
| 8 |
> source was being rolled into the systemd tarball. It implies that |
| 9 |
> eselect init will eventually become mandatory. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Let me restate: |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
As long there isn't a strict necessity the whole machinery should not |
| 14 |
impact the normal systems with the default init. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> Your situation is a special use-case, i.e. a developer who wants to |
| 17 |
> switch between a "production" init system, and a "test" init system, |
| 18 |
> possibly multiple times a day. You're a developer, you know which files |
| 19 |
> to change, put together your own scripts, and run them as necessary. |
| 20 |
> Set up your own overlay and write your own eselect init ebuild. No |
| 21 |
> problem. But why should this eventually be a part of mainstream Gentoo? |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
e4rat, bootchart and other addons might be more mainstream than |
| 24 |
gdb-as-init indeed. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> BTW, I'm a bigger fan of busybox than most Gentoo users. Remember the |
| 27 |
> announcement of systemd/udev tarball integration, and supposed |
| 28 |
> deprecation of a separate /usr? I was the ****-disturber who started up |
| 29 |
> the https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Mdev wiki page on how to replace udev |
| 30 |
> with mdev. I also did a page on automounting at... |
| 31 |
> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Mdev/Automount_USB/automount Having said |
| 32 |
> that, I don't see how busybox development justifies an additional layer |
| 33 |
> of complexity for everybody's bootup. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
It isn't every bootup =) |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
lu |
Archives