Hi, Nuno Magalhães <nunomagalh...@eu.ipp.pt> writes: > On 2014-11-16 11:40, Klistvud wrote: >> 1. Reviving the existing init systems. Modernizing them, making them >> into true, interchangeable drop-in replacements of each other, which do >> the task assigned, and do it well. Each of them accomplishing at least >> the common subset of tasks an init system is supposed to provide. >> >> 2. Complementing them with existing or new tools (again, drop-in >> interchangeable replacements of each other) which build on them and >> provide the next layer. For example, the kernel autofs facility provides >> very nice automounting and could be deployed to the majority of desktop >> installs (instead of being just an optional package, as it is now), thus >> making the various automount daemons of the various desktop >> environments/file managers virtually superfluous. As a further example, >> the former udev (prior to being merged into systemd) has already been >> forked and could/will serve us well for years to come. And so on. > > +1 for being reasonable and making sense > > It's an approach that would keep a lot of people happy and, more > importantly (at least to me), it gives the user choice instead of taking > it away. At least this way each user could choose the loosely-coupled > components s/he wanted.
Nobody is stopping anybody from improving sysvinit if they want to. So, have fun hacking on it. ;) Ansgar -- 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/8761efp6ka....@deep-thought.43-1.org