On 09/13/2011 09:48 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 09/14/2011 06:47 AM, Genes MailLists wrote: >> Good points - up to a point - but lets go slow and think for a few >> minutes - unlike the kernel which is very hardware dependent and >> therefore may run on many machines but not all, systemd is no - or >> should not be for its core functionality. Its a piece of software that >> should run exactly the same way for all hardware - this is certainly >> true for its core functionality - it does indeed take on additional >> roles and I have not looked at the source code to see how well / >> robustly it handles exceptions ... The chances of it failing for a >> subset of users after being decently tested is way lower than for >> kernel code > > You may very well be right but there is a very high risk involved if it > fails for say 5% of the users. I don't see anything in the newer > version that justifies taking that risk overriding the upstream > developers judgement. > > Rahul > > Honestly, if systemd updates has 5% of users failing on an update to the software - we should dump the thing immediately and go back to upstart. That is insanely high bug rate for core code which is (or should be) pretty simple. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
