From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ont6e-00041e-2H for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 13:00:00 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6BE34E0A5C; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:59:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 042D7E09BD for ; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:59:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from marsupilami.localnet (84-238-115-127.u.parknet.dk [84.238.115.127]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7E8F81B4014 for ; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:59:25 +0000 (UTC) From: Thilo Bangert Organization: Gentoo To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 14:57:45 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.35.1; KDE/4.4.5; i686; ; ) References: <201007041630.07537.polynomial-c@gentoo.org> <1282584393.4313.6.camel@TesterTop4> <4C738E95.1010501@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <4C738E95.1010501@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart9035338.GyqMKlRq9P"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201008241457.49173.bangert@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 4a6ad026-ab72-4a05-ad06-c5014ffeedbc X-Archives-Hash: 258e545173b1cc64b7bf0d385e809bf1 --nextPart9035338.GyqMKlRq9P Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Or you just let a shell handle it. Does most of the things > automatically, has a pretty low memory and startup overhead, and it > tends to be quite human-readable. >=20 > ... why would I want to remove a=20 > stable the biggest complaint about openrc is that its not in stable - go figure. > , efficient, known-good solution > that does what you'd expect it to do and replace it with a new thingy > that doesn't provide all the features, is harder to debug etc. etc.? I > just don't see any *advantage* from it apart from saying "OMG HAZ NEW > FEATRUES" :) one feature of systemd is, that it has an active upstream.=20 no, i dont think it would be a good idea to switch to systemd, just yet.=20 but like the original baselayout was breaking new ground back when it=20 first was developed, so is systemd. it does things differently and may not= =20 have all features yet, but from the outset it appears to be vastly=20 superior to sysv-style inits, upstart and openrc. granted, systemd is currently able to attract enthusiastic supporters.=20 reducing these to mere fanboys, however, is ignoring the technical=20 solution that systemd proposes. yes, openrc works great - and yes, systemd= =20 is a better solution when looking at the overall problem. given how long, so far, it has taken openrc to reach stable, it is no=20 wonder people start lobbying for systemd today. ;-) kind regards Thilo --nextPart9035338.GyqMKlRq9P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkxzwc0ACgkQxRElEoA5Anf+FgCgx7ff/dyh8nVycJURt+FbsTkd bK0AoLFEgEDF/HSVWFwO2YiwWQy5sZqC =++U+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart9035338.GyqMKlRq9P--