Hi Thorsten, Thorsten Glaser <t.gla...@tarent.de> writes:
> … this applies to the shim only. I was a bit surprised seeing on > someone else’s system that it was no longer installable, but almost > all systemd-free systems of people I know do not use the shim anyway, > so I’d take the Subject line with a few grains of salt. > > With only two modified binary packages (policykit-1 and udisks2) I’ve > got a complete KDE environment running, except for network-manager, > without the shim. People who do not use the full desktop environments > (but the leaner ones, or just a window manager, or no X11 at all) have > no problems with the current situation. > >> > sysvinit currently has two maintainers, but they've only >> > ever made one upload (over a year ago). >> >> It seems that these facts are either largely ignored or unknown and I >> wonder if some noise should be made so that interested people can pick >> up the work now and not only complain later. > > Why would sysvinit need uploads? It’s largely working software > that needs few changes. I personally find upload frequency as > a measurement misused too often: sure, no uploads raises some > questions, but more than four to six uploads a year should, in > my opinion, raise even more questions (namely whether the soft‐ > ware is ripe and stable enough in the first place). I was about to reply to this thread, but you have completely expressed what I want to say: 1. systemd-shim is not necessary, even for DEs (except GNOME3). 2. sysvinit-core is very stable and do not need new uploads. Cheers, Benda