Earlier quoted context omitted.
systemd breaks LXC and lmctfy. systemd is not event based (matter of taste, I guess, but I prefer Upstart's model).
What are you talking about? CoreOS uses docker + systemd extensively and docker is just a pretty wrapper ontop of lxc. https://coreos.com/docs/launching-containers/launching/getti...
Debian committee members vote for systemd as init system
71–80 of 152 posts
Re: Debian committee members vote for systemd as init system
#72For a fun retelling of the events (I think this only works on Firefox): http://aceattorney.sparklin.org/jeu.php?id_proces=57684
I wonder if other complicated debates, especially political, could be presented in such a format, and if this would have a positive effect for informed democracy?
Re: Debian committee members vote for systemd as init system
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
When RedHat decides to switch to DEB
And why would Reshat want to move to a clearly inferior solution? Next you'll say they want to replace the super simple kickstart with preseed. Blasphemy I say!
Re: Debian committee members vote for systemd as init system
#74For a fun retelling of the events (I think this only works on Firefox): http://aceattorney.sparklin.org/jeu.php?id_proces=57684
This is the second part: http://aceattorney.sparklin.org/jeu.php?id_proces=57899
Re: Debian committee members vote for systemd as init system
#75Re: Debian committee members vote for systemd as init system
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair he is also the Ubuntu developer and upstart maintainer on the committee
What is there to be or to not "be fair" about? mjn's comment was a value neutral statement of fact. There was nothing prejudicial in his comment.
Re: Debian committee members vote for systemd as init system
#77For those unfamiliar with Pulseaudio development, it's a third-generation audio subsystem (after OSS and ALSA with JACK forming two previous ones, and ESD being the beginning of the third) that is famous for overcomplicated, non-human-writable barely human-readable configuration procedure, development marred with huge number of bugs that ruined audio on Linux until recently, and suffering from immense number of internal interfaces and system being presented as a huge monolithic piece of software that can not be used in a modular manner except as modules that only talk among themselves.
systemd seems to suffer from the same problems, plus it tries to "integrate" init, udev and syslog into a single "product", with arcane internal interfaces and formats -- just as non-human-writable as Pulseaudio.
Re: Debian committee members vote for systemd as init system
#78For a fun retelling of the events (I think this only works on Firefox): http://aceattorney.sparklin.org/jeu.php?id_proces=57684
Re: Debian committee members vote for systemd as init system
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just my two cents as I haven't seen it mentioned in this thread: launchd is the init system used by Mac OSX and has been ported to FreeBSD a few years ago with a recent resurgent effort for improvements [1]. It has been suggested that launchd could one day be the new FreeBSD init system due to speed and feature improvements, but many FreeBSD users think that the init system is a non-issue and efforts could be better…
systemd is basically launchd for Linux (and only Linux). The systemd devs make no apology about the launchd inspiration.
Re: Debian committee members vote for systemd as init system
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are no working ports of upstart to non-linux, and up until 2 months ago no-one was even trying to. It's about as portable as systemd (i.e. with a bunch of work and if you don't mind forking it).
The difference is that upstream for upstart is open to BSD/Hurd/etc. ports, whereas upstream for systemd is pretty strongly opposed to them and it does not seem they would assist in the effort.