On 14 August 2012 11:58, Jelle van der Waa <jelle@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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 > I remember seeing the comparisons against SysV but not at all against upstart or OpenRC
