On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 12:15:17PM +0100, KatolaZ wrote: > On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 12:08:47PM +0200, info at smallinnovations dot nl > wrote: ... ... > > Expanding to that we can even make a libsystemd0 that actually works with > > any init system (except systemd) for all relevant init parts and to all > > other calls answering that systemd is not present. > > > > > > I fail to see the importance of such task, since I really don't > understand what are these things that all init systems have in common, > except for riping orphaned processes. But again, if you feel like > having a library for all init systems to share is something worth > doing, please do it.
The point is that that proposed libsystemd0 would *not* be an init system, and it would still enable software that was written to use systemd to run flawlessly. But I have to agree that writing such a thing is infeasible because the so-called systemd cabal can change the specs faster than anyone can do the reverse engineering. And it will take reverse engineering, because the specs aren't sufficient. I use the term "strategic incompetence" for the organisations that produce such system(d)s. -- hendrik _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
