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 2A961138E20 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 18:37:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 466F1E0B76; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 18:36:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-oa0-f48.google.com (mail-oa0-f48.google.com [209.85.219.48]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40296E0B55 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 18:36:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oa0-f48.google.com with SMTP id l6so2552582oag.21 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:36:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=fQGNMnzW/affLD88pYROnROiBe6i1E2WjyNHQFMxd3k=; b=00iMfNCe1l+ewdw71764bLiX851JMgwwdPlFg+Ka3FjvHqCgZ10CcAMeXbZheZgS5M Q7/QX3EK/JEXih74ZV2G4jiNTPBxSzPQifxHVwM8xCA9jMGOBEDv9fxhqC0zmabA4lf7 Ij5OEVUiqyY5m4pWKfinss9nmxkp6B7fTVawSDVsiP7FgqOtsitlGeYkxDRKACeCnDU9 liPqDZJjo7SryhT2B8GYJa890MC45geHiE+xz2AmPRLg6YI75MpOXOQoXumBttFvn5xF AnR4FfkV1lMLZywvA61ufjEjNFS345bx1Ci4A9D9VfSkQ6Y25apIvWUBQjwlnW7fA0JI hTRA== 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 X-Received: by 10.60.231.235 with SMTP id tj11mr1687664oec.41.1392921417256; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:36:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.182.46.37 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:36:57 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <530646EA.4020300@libertytrek.org> References: <52FF84CE.2050301@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> <5304A5DE.4050905@libertytrek.org> <5305FACC.8080705@libertytrek.org> <530646EA.4020300@libertytrek.org> Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 12:36:57 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie From: =?UTF-8?B?Q2FuZWsgUGVsw6FleiBWYWxkw6lz?= To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 6413c845-4948-4086-9330-e0668552f278 X-Archives-Hash: 16ad4531a71b9ee8a56a2a6334a6441f On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Tanstaafl wro= te: > On 2014-02-20 10:55 AM, Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9s = wrote: >> >> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Tanstaafl >> wrote: >>> >>> while I agree with most everything you said, your primary point - >>> that it should be the people who *don't* want systemd doing all of >>> the work - was backwards, and that was what I wanted to point out. > > >> I still believe that a non-systemd profile should be done by the >> people not wanting to use systemd. But since I now support the systemd >> profile (since it's trivial) the point is moot. > > > > > >>> Bottom line: since Gentoo's default and primary init system is (and >>> hopefully will be for a very long time) OpenRC, it is on the systemd >>> folks >>> to do the work to get systemd fully supported. > > >> Which has been the case up until now. > > > As you have freely admitted that OpenRC being the default init system for > gentoo is unlikely to change anytime soon, I'm at a loss as to how you ca= n > justify your first comment above? Your comment would only make sense if > systemd was made the default init system. OK, I think I get the misunderstanding. This is how I saw the discussion: 1. Some people started to say that systemd should go on its own profile. The people saying that DID NOT wanted to use systemd. 2. I thought that the people using systemd were not interested in making a systemd profile (I was wrong, the profile basically already exists). 3. Since you cannot FORCE no one to work on something, then the burden of work of this systemd profile would have landed on the people NOT WANTING to use systemd. To me, this does not make sense. 4. When someone (don't remember whom) proposed a systemd-sucks profile, I thought that was perfect, because the burden of work then would have landed on the people that want this profile. I even volunteered to help. 5. The moment I saw that the profile is already done, I changed my mind; the people using systemd ALREADY did the work (which seems to be trivial, BTW; I didn't knew that either), therefore no one is trying forcing anyone to do work, then a systemd profile is fine (since it's already done). This is orthogonal to which init system is the default, I think. I was just arguing that if a group A of people want a profile X, that group A of people must do the work to get said profile X working. In the case of systemd, that means *using* systemd, so it made no sense to me that the group A did the work, when they *do not* want to use systemd. Once again, all of this is made moot by the fact that the systemd profile is basically available now. But that does not change my point that if someone wants a X profile, then the burden of work must fall on that someone. Clear now? Regards. --=20 Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9s Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingenier=C3=ADa de la Computaci=C3=B3n Universidad Nacional Aut=C3=B3noma de M=C3=A9xico