also sprach paddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.29.0512 +0200]: > and (again my instinct is) as far as possible, debian should be > looking to be init agnostic, not fall into the ghetto of > a distro-specific implementation.
it's not distro-specific if others adopt it, and if upstart prove worthy, I might well join Scott in its development (and so will others). It came from Ubuntu, and Scott is certainly very focused on Ubuntu, but he does seem like a reasonable guy. :) /me waves to Scott. > there are bigger fish to fry than usability or performance: > clusters, embedded systems, security, stabilty, portability, etc > ... Any reasons why those cannot use init-as-is? upstart will take a long while to make it into base. It needs massive testing, but it's good to have it around to be able to do so. > it was the word 'default' what woke me up :-) That didn't come from Debian, did it? -- .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' : proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system bush/cheney '04: the last vote you'll ever have to cast.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)
_______________________________________________ initscripts-ng-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/initscripts-ng-devel
