On 10/24/2014 4:49 AM, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <j.deboynepollard-newsgro...@ntlworld.com> wrote: > Tanstaafl: >> And why was OPenRC not a contender?
> Your question takes a falsehood as its premise. It actually was, > contrary to what M. Popescu dismissively stated. Several members of the > technical committee took it and tried to use it themselves, just as they > did the other systems; and it was included on the formal ballots and in > the votes. I actually do remember reading a fleeting mention of it somewhere in the vast sea of stuff I read when trying to catch up on this issue... > Contrastingly, the people who were propounding OpenRC at the > time provided a good example of how NOT to go about doing so. Their > several mistakes are worth learning from. Not sure I understand what you are saying here... Are you saying that some of the people who suggested OpenRC actually provided BAD examples - meaning, examples that were destined to result in problems - of how to use it in Debian? If so, maybe that was on purpose, to decrease the chances of OpenRC being a real contender? The fact is, OpenRC has been the default init system on gentoo since I don't know when, and I have *never* had an init problem on any of my gentoo systems - although I admittedly never use unstable/testing for system-critical packages either... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/544a32ef.3090...@libertytrek.org