From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17B5813800E for ; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 19:43:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B0327E0773; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 19:43:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 221E2E05F9 for ; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 19:43:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiocik.lan (87-205-57-138.adsl.inetia.pl [87.205.57.138]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6ED361B4005; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 19:43:01 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 21:43:32 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: lu_zero@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Questions about SystemD and OpenRC Message-ID: <20120809214332.1a49b0a8@pomiocik.lan> In-Reply-To: <502377E7.8010803@gentoo.org> References: <1344366029.24762.31.camel@TesterTop4> <502377E7.8010803@gentoo.org> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.11; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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; micalg=PGP-SHA256; boundary="Sig_/mujtJM3z08/sw29DFuTGYOT"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: f1b90a1c-cf5f-490c-bb1c-2cb303f5ce49 X-Archives-Hash: f666e3a27c29e39f2d378515dd3ad75f --Sig_/mujtJM3z08/sw29DFuTGYOT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 09 Aug 2012 10:42:15 +0200 Luca Barbato wrote: > Repeat after me: having your first process require anything more than > libc is stupid and dangerous. But you are aware that glibc is probably much, much worse than most of those 'stupid and dangerous' libraries, right? > Once that concept gets accepted then we could discuss about why > reinventing shellscript may not be that sound and other less glaring, > horrid and appalling design choices. Yes, exactly. So why does openrc reinvent that horrible shellscript? --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --Sig_/mujtJM3z08/sw29DFuTGYOT Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iJwEAQEIAAYFAlAkEuYACgkQfXuS5UK5QB1MAQP/XupElwixuF3B9aN+IeX3GjdI ni/aO9CGM1M0IUfM5rN9cQ8dykmaZW9L/2E8FzQkwRhNKvMdfdAMaz5IgtvUDBfh yTuBweed+HBIaVPXANV/j41olkOkCtXSaNYgjh7L4KO+cwZjsaJUd9I03qJTu6Ow 3Z8py1jR9CLPD8h9RDs= =V9pS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/mujtJM3z08/sw29DFuTGYOT--