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 32ECE138E20 for ; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 10:34:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C0DFEE0C9D; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 10:34:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mahal.bihira.com (mahal.bihira.com [50.7.77.170]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BAF9FE0C40 for ; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 10:34:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from 145.70-40-238.netnet.net ([70.40.238.145]:53148 helo=[192.168.1.144]) by mahal.bihira.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1WG4U6-004IhR-NW for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 10:34:35 +0000 Message-ID: <530488BB.4060206@sporkbox.us> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 04:34:35 -0600 From: Daniel Campbell User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie References: <52FF84CE.2050301@libertytrek.org> <5300DD51.5060207@libertytrek.org> <53010A8E.2050909@googlemail.com> <53012691.6040503@googlemail.com> <20140217215255.5766cb026df2f0b8002f8702@gmail.com> <5302c048.462f0e0a.3d3e.5888@mx.google.com> <20140218210633.d25f4bb88b3891f7c0ed11c6@gmail.com> <20140218220712.9ec8d2529ef49d743b3bc826@gmail.com> <5304576E.4000704@sporkbox.us> <20140219090226.1609dedd@digimed.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20140219090226.1609dedd@digimed.co.uk> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - mahal.bihira.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.gentoo.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - sporkbox.us X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: mahal.bihira.com: authenticated_id: lists@sporkbox.us X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Archives-Salt: 9fb37440-67c5-45d8-b4d8-57d70c68bd1d X-Archives-Hash: 999c75e317a0efc2c4a95192ed9a3d5f -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 02/19/2014 03:02 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Wed, 19 Feb 2014 01:04:14 -0600, Daniel Campbell wrote: > >>>> Or to create a non-systemd profile :) > >> For such a profile to be legitimate, systemd would have to be >> chosen as the default. > > Quite the opposite, to have a separate systemd profile would mean > that systemd was not the default, otherwise it would be in the > default profile. Not that defaults really matter with Gentoo, you > have a systemd profile and an openrc profile, who gives a toss > which is default when you have a simple to make choice? > >> Gentoo is one of the last bastions of choice available to >> GNU/Linux users and it would create a complete shitstorm if >> systemd were pushed on Gentoo's users. > > 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. 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. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTBIi7AAoJEJUrb08JgYgHducH/2VLDbRimgiZ1rM404CjIDwy nl5dCdNcu6XtXt/q5zxY9zVUyYQtGCZmZxT1s41xT0NpYlMv2mo++tASuZwI5tye 1bzjzd9wGPwYwqTgrWgfusH170zWURaTKXwvTAgzZowKR++MXr918HtDiHzIJtpR QjSBvMHK3TXFe1dSQKwHFYqJ/uhx1sGTsKh7tDGdUIknXB0oaVSvuzZAlzy+2GMV g4x189EVO46kuOSXkBWobFGVwbYSttADg97Wgol55NZiyKPGaqioHKJoLeUYVlCt NR4L76APyUHXBqdfk+/9clPHOg3x7XJuo/cjluTjC2yDvezWpojEUJKgNAZ0fZ8= =jg5F -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----