On 02/03/2014 14:16, Daniel Sousa wrote: > I am also only a Debian user and I don't know much about the matter, > but if I understand correctly systemd is a drop in replacement for > sysV, which has a lot more functionalities but works fine with sysV > initscrits.
It apparently doesn't work with *all* sysv initscripts; but yes, I believe it's a drop-in replacement for sysvinit, in the sense that it will use sysv init scripts if systemd units are unavailable. > > Wouldn't it be possible, in the future, to write a replacement to > systemd which works fine with the systemd configuration, but that > doesn't have most of those problems that systemd has? I suppose it would; but I don't believe anyone is working on that. Also, I don't know whether it would be possible to write a systemd replacement that didn't depend on (or incorporate) dbus. I don't know enough about how it works. Note that this replacement needs to be ready for the Jessie release! There's not much time. But here's the thing: systemd is being developed (and pushed) by a distro that can afford to pay lots of developers. Plenty of work is still being done on it. The interfaces have changed several times already, so this replacement would probably be chasing a moving target. If the replacement were a volunteer effort, then they may struggle to keep up. Ummm - I believe this discussion is largely off-topic on debian-security. This is a list that a lot of users need to follow to keep up with vulnerabilities and security fixes, and there must be a more appropriate venue for discussions of this kind - so I'm going to drop out. -- Jack. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-security-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53135956.2040...@jackpot.uk.net