| 1 |
On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 11:14:28PM +0200, Fabio Erculiani wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 9:52 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." |
| 3 |
> <phajdan.jr@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > On 5/1/13 3:04 AM, Fabio Erculiani wrote: |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > As far as I read the bug, Mike (vapier) is doing the right thing. |
| 7 |
> > Distros doing lots of custom changes can only add more chaos to the picture. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> We are a distribution, we have our own goals, thus we change the code |
| 10 |
> to better integrate with our ecosystem. |
| 11 |
> That's part of the game. If we don't want to do that, we shouldn't be |
| 12 |
> running a distro in the first place. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > Have you reached out to relevant upstreams? If they refuse to make |
| 16 |
> > changes, that's a different story. So far I think it's reasonable to go |
| 17 |
> > to upstreams first. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> For just a symlink swap and some file moves? (re: sysvinit) |
| 20 |
> We don't need to bless upstream first for such small changes. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Like I've already said too, I don't see that we need to do this change. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Systemd is called /usr/lib/systemd/systemd (it should be |
| 25 |
/lib/systemd/systemd), and sysvinit is called /sbin/init,, so I don't |
| 26 |
see the need for moving init around and creating all of these symlinks. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
I guess I'm not completely opposed to it, I just want you to convince me |
| 29 |
that doing it has value. Where I am now is I feel like it adds |
| 30 |
complexity for almost no gain. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
William |
Archives