On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 06:58:10AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > Aigars Mahinovs wrote: > > On 28 October 2014 12:12, Josselin Mouette <j...@debian.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 10:30:50AM +0100, Richard Hartmann wrote: > > > > Has anyone actually tested the viability of running systemd in > > > > non-PID-1 mode? > > > > If yes, does this work and would it continue to work? > > > > If yes, is there any hard commitment from upstream in this regard? > > > > > > This is nice and all, but how to you tell such a “sub-init” which > > > services have been already started and which services it has to start > > > itself? > > > > The point of a sub-init would be to start one specific service. > > Basically the idea would be that in /etc/init.d/gdm3 init script, > > instead of starting the gdm daemon, one would start systemd with a > > very special set of configurations (possibly even separate and > > different from what one would use in a normal, systemd-based startup > > of gdm). And on stopping of that service one would stop that whole > > sub-init. > > In a sub-init configuration, systemd itself would start either from > inittab or from a relatively early init script. Packages and services
On Sat, Nov 01, 2014 at 10:41:54PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Real problems? Apart from a couple of more reasonable people, I have > yet to see systemd criticism in factual terms, rather than entirely > made-up claims or vague accusations of destroying the Unix way of > life. What is the reason that one can't easily run logind, or even better a systemd process running logind and possibly other services, under the runsv program from the runit init scheme, or through /etc/inittab? Thanks. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141103202943.25586.qm...@863d2757a98da2.315fe32.mid.smarden.org