Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users

[Fabio Erculiani]

On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o> wrote:
> El mié, 01-05-2013 a las 12:04 +0200, Fabio Erculiani escribió:
> [...]
>> - other ~490 systemd units are missing at this time and writing them
>> could also be a great GSoC project (don't look at me, I'm busy
>> enough).
> [...]
>
> Can't them be stolen from other distros running systemd?

Sure, Arch and Fedora repositories are a good source.

>
> [...]
>> The only remaining problem is about eselect-sysvinit, for this reason,
>> I am probably going to create a new separate pkg called
>> _sysvinit-next_, that contains all the fun stuff many developers were
>> not allowed to commit (besides my needs, there is also the need of
>> splitting sysvinit due to the issues reported in [4]). I am sure that
>> a masked alternative sysvinit ebuild won't hurt anybody and will make
>> Gentoo a bit more fun to use.
>>
>
> I am unable to find exact advantage of changing init system without
> rebooting :/, what is the advantage of booting with an init.d and
> shutting down with a different one?

No, you don't boot with A and shutdown with B. B is loaded by the
kernel at the next boot.
Switching init system is the only way to roll out a migration path,
among other things I already wrote about on the eselect-sysvinit bug.

>
>> The final outcome will hopefully be:
>> - easier to migrate from/to systemd, at runtime, with NO recompilation
>> at all (just enable USE=systemd and switch the device manager from
>> *udev to systemd -- unless somebody wants to drop the udev part from
>> systemd, if at all possible)
>
> Are udev and systemd-udev-part really equivalent? I mean, since they are
> maintained by different people downstream, I am not sure if there would
> be differences in how udev from udev ebuild and udev from systemd ebuild
> will behave.

This needs investigation.

>
> Best regards and thanks for your work!
>
>



-- 
Fabio Erculiani