| 1 |
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Marc Stürmer <mail@×××××××××××××.de> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am 22.01.2015 um 19:06 schrieb Tom H: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> Sure. My point was that anyone can claim that systemd is (un)popular |
| 5 |
>> in the embedded space. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> I don't know if it is popular; in embedded systems though the last thing you |
| 8 |
> need are fast moving targets IMHO, you want to use proven, reliable tools. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> If systemd is reliable or not, this depends on your decision, but it is a |
| 11 |
> fast moving target. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
It's not necessarily a fast moving target. RHEL 7 uses an |
| 14 |
upstream-maintained "208 stable" (and AFAIR Debian 8 will also use |
| 15 |
it). |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
For embedded systems that never used sysvinit, systemd is unlikely |
| 18 |
ever to be an option but for others anyone can claim either that |
| 19 |
systemd is the best choice possible or that it's the worst choice |
| 20 |
possible without any proof either way. |
Archives