Re: How about a fork of Jessie without systemd?

On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 01:26:34PM -0700, Don Marti wrote:
> begin /dev/rob0 quotation of Mon, May 16, 2016 at 11:46:27AM -0500:
> 
> > Nevertheless, systemd is making it difficult for GNU/Linux 
> > distributors to continue without systemd.  You [Greg] mentioned 
> > Slackware upthread, and I know that Slackware is feeling the 
> > pinch. I'm sure that's directly related to the unusually long 
> > time we're seeing since the previous Slackware release.
> 
> It's not systemd making it difficult for distributions
> to continue without systemd.  It's upstream software
> (for a good example, see the "hplip" package in
> Rick's article.)

Yes, you are right, and in fact I started thinking about that word 
choice right after sending.  Thanks for the clarification.

>  * Package has some random init-related problem.
> 
>  * Someone writes or contributes a systemd-related
>    solution.
> 
>  * Nobody has any real issues with the solution.
> 
>  * The package comes to depend on systemd.
> 
> Hard to argue with, since it means that the package
> maintainers are now maintaining one line in a systemd
> unit file instead of some shell script, so they can
> spend more time on work that solves problems for
> their users.
-- 
  http://rob0.nodns4.us/
_______________________________________________
Do not Cc: anyone else on mail sent to this list.  The list server is set for maximum one recipient.
linux-elitists mailing list
[email protected]
http://zgp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-elitists