On Thu, 9 Aug 2012 16:45:28 -0400
Michael Mol <mike...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 9 Aug 2012 22:27:37 +0200
> > Peter Stuge <pe...@stuge.se> wrote:
> >
> >> Rich Freeman wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
> >> > Systemd isn't a like-for-like replacement for traditional inits.
> >> > It aims to be much more, so this is a bit of an apples-to-oranges
> >> > comparison.
> >>
> >> Yes, it is much more, which is a very nice thing on the systems
> >> it supports. I believe systemd is not usuable at all outside Linux
> >> and will not likely ever be, so for prefix there will anyway always
> >> be systemd alternatives in Gentoo! And on those systems the service
> >> files should never be installed.
> >
> > Considering that systemd unit files are sometimes shipped with
> > upstream packages, and often they are practically equivalent to
> > openrc init scripts, I'd rather see openrc supporting that file
> > format as an extension and using it instead of duplicating the same
> > thing in init.d scripts.
> >
> > And yes, that means that people masking service files shoot
> > themselves in the foot.
> >
> > Also, if I had more time (or support), I'd probably start working
> > on a systemd-compatible init system with a more portable design.
> 
> I would find this very interesting. I doubt I could find time for much
> active contribution, unfortunately, but I'd help where I could.

Well, the sad thing is that I don't really have much expertise in this
area. I like the philosophy of designing many smalls things which just
work well together, so I would probably start that by reinventing some
helper tools.

It would be most helpful to get some aid from OpenRC team. I believe
that some common-use tools written for the project could be used
and tested in OpenRC first. And that way, slowly a new init system
could enter the world.

Sadly, it would be strictly bound to file formats and names set by
systemd team.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to