On Sun, 07 Feb 2016, Leonid Isaev wrote: > On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 06:02:34AM +0100, Ivan wrote: > > Hypothetically, if Arch Linux was to adopt an alternative init, it's a > > process that does not happen overnight. Through time, solutions will > > surface. I'm not a magic lamp genie that has all the answers. > > Then you have to ask yourself, what defines a distribution. If you are going to > bring in ck, patch polkit, gnome, kde, xfce, etc, and introduce customizations > to lots of other packages, isn't it easier to start from gentoo or alpine and > maintain pacman for those distros? I am asking because you are going to > duplicate a fair share of official repos... Well, for starters, Arch isn't just about pacman. I get the feeling you think it is. For me, the "killer" features of Arch are the AUR and its huge, excellent community. I could just run off and start a new distro, but this is not the point. I realize, and I've talked about it in one of the previous emails where I discussed the way packages could/should be built.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
