On 08/14/12 17:55, Calvin Morrison wrote: > On 14 August 2012 10:57, Stéphane Gaudreault <stephane@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Systemd has a overall better design than SysV, lots of useful administrative >> features and provide quicker boot up. Considering that it has been around in >> our repositories for some time and that it could be considered stable enough >> for production use, I would suggest to replace iniscript by systemd once the >> 'Missing systemd units' is over. Thus we will avoid duplicating our efforts >> on two init systems. >> >> Any objections to start the migration process ? >> >> Cheers, >> >> Stéphane >> >> > > I'd love to see the overall advantages and disadvantages of each of > those fleshed out on a page where I can read them - I know I can't > order anyone to do it, and my comment doesn't effect the outcome, but > I would really like to see a good explanation of the advantages in an > unbiased (aka not by LP) explanation of why it is better for arch. Is > systemd suckless? is it easy to maintain? is it going to around for > several years? have we considered Upstart? what about OpenRC? > > before Arch jump ship, I would love to see some good details. I have > been trying to keep up Tom's posts on the general, so maybe I should > revisit them. > > Calvin > Tom has listed the advantages a couple of times in arch-general. -- Jelle van der Waa
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
