On Wed, 19 Feb 2014 04:34:35 -0600, Daniel Campbell wrote:

> > How is putting systemd setting in a profile that a user has to 
> > consciously choose to use forcing anything on anyone? Profiles are
> > the essence of choice but it appears you only want the choices you
> > approve of to be available.

> Perhaps I didn't phrase it correctly. Logically, a "non systemd"
> profile would necessitate either a systemd profile, or require the
> default to already ship systemd. I hadn't considered the prior
> existence of systemd profiles, which we currently have, so afaict the
> issue is mostly moot.

We already have non-systemd profiles. Until recently that is all we had.

> Choices are great until the existence of other choices infringes on
> mine. Profiles prevent that, so I have no problem with systemd
> profiles. The problem lies with evangelists who aren't happy with
> systemd being *a* choice. They want systemd to be *the* choice, *the*
> default. That is what I take issue with.

Why are you so concerned about the default, not that anyone in this
thread has suggested making systemd the default, not even Canek? If you
cannot use eselect profile set, Gentoo is not for you anyway? The
handbook tells you to select a profile quite early in the installation,
there is no default - portage complain loudly if you haven't chosen a
profile, so I fail to see how anyone can force systemd (or openrc for
that matter) on users when the choice must be made.

There are technical arguments for and against systemd, which is why this
thread was started, rhetoric about forcing default profiles on people
when there is no such thing as a default profile only serve to cloud the
real issues.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

System halted - hit any Microsoft employee to continue.