| 1 |
El vie, 21-06-2013 a las 13:19 +0200, Fabio Erculiani escribió: |
| 2 |
> For me, the big selling points of eselect-init are: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> 1. as release engineer, i can prepare images that use either systemd |
| 5 |
> or openrc (at present time these are the two supported options) and do |
| 6 |
> it reliably, programmatically. |
| 7 |
> 2. as distro maintainer, i can roll out a migration path from openrc |
| 8 |
> to systemd (or vice versa). The properties of this migration path I am |
| 9 |
> looking for are reliability and "atomicity". Basically, once you move |
| 10 |
> logind/consolekit detection to runtime (and believe it or not, many |
| 11 |
> upstream just get it wrong), and have feature parity in the systemd |
| 12 |
> units available (wrt openrc initscripts), switching over is a matter |
| 13 |
> of 2 (soon 1) commands. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Both of them are quite important, because there are scenarios in where |
| 16 |
> systemd fits better than openrc, and scenarios in where openrc is a |
| 17 |
> better fit (older kernels, production system with custom init scripts |
| 18 |
> that are not worth the porting, etc). |
| 19 |
> Making the switch between openrc and systemd easy is a big win (for |
| 20 |
> both developers, distro maintainers, users) and makes Gentoo more |
| 21 |
> attractive, but this is another topic... |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Thanks for the explanation. But I think that, currently, the only |
| 25 |
remaining "objection" is whether play with /sbin/init (that needs |
| 26 |
sysvinit to be changed if I don't misremember) or with /sbin/einit. |
| 27 |
Looks like mgorny has shown some problems on relying on "einit" instead |
| 28 |
of plain "init" regarding to fallback :/ |
Archives