| 1 |
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 22:07:12 +0400, Andrew Savchenko wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> > Then write. Just be aware that to write a systemd profile, you need to |
| 4 |
> > use systemd. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Or to create a non-systemd profile :) |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
We already have many of those, because systemd is not the default. Part |
| 9 |
of making it the default, if that decision is ever taken, would be to |
| 10 |
modify the current profiles to support systemd, at which point the old |
| 11 |
versions would become the non-systemd profiles. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Yes, it does take systemd users/devs to create a systemd profile, but |
| 14 |
they are the one that will want to use it anyway. The rest already have |
| 15 |
what they want. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
This is the way things have moved with the GNOME and KDE profiles, expect |
| 18 |
others to follow suit. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
I'm still uncomfortable with the pervasiveness of systemd, although Canek |
| 21 |
does put forward persuasive arguments, through a mixture of expertise and |
| 22 |
remaining calm. So GNOME want to use logind, which may well be superior |
| 23 |
to ConsoleKit, but why should that require a change of init system? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
A login daemon should be started by the init system, not be an integral |
| 26 |
part of it. What happens when logind no longer fulfils developers needs, |
| 27 |
as is the case with ConsoleKit now, how can it be replaced with an |
| 28 |
improved service when it is so closely tied to the init system. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Windows '96 artificial intelligence: Unable to FORMAT A: Having a go at C: |
Archives