| 1 |
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 12:19 AM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> So, I ask again. You keep complaining about "insanity". What's the |
| 3 |
> insanity and why should we go to all of the extra effort you want us to |
| 4 |
> go to to avoid it? |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
I think it's more of a knee-jerk reaction to this: Redhat is pushing |
| 7 |
systemd very hard, and its technical merits have gained a lot of sway |
| 8 |
in many places. As such, it seems like lots of everything are joining |
| 9 |
a fast-paced systemd stampede. Seeing that udevd has been renamed to |
| 10 |
something with "systemd" in the name raises a gut fear "oh no, now |
| 11 |
something as fundamental as udev is becoming systemdified. It's just a |
| 12 |
matter of time before init.d disappears forever." To the |
| 13 |
non-systemd'ers, I think the general perception is that without any |
| 14 |
set of policies to manage the stampede, systemd will eventually take |
| 15 |
over. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Maybe this fear is warranted. Maybe it's silly. I don't know. I am |
| 18 |
glad, though, that Gentoo is sticking with OpenRC, and I hope that the |
| 19 |
consequences of that decision are respected by ebuild maintainers. |
Archives