From: Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx> > Here ya go. Much appreciated! Looks like I've been a little more than ignorant on newer developments. I thought just a little start-time dependency checking here, and a little LSB compliance there was all that was being address. And I think I'll spend the next few days learning the D-BUS interfaces before commenting any more. Definitely agree that this is going to be a framework that has to be written in C. I'm fine there, love system-level stuff (although the same statement by Linus, "I wrote it in C, but some people might not call what I write C" probably applies even more so to me). <soapbox> Too bad about launchd being APSL. It's stuff like that, along with IBM CPL, IPL as well as Sun (insert our acronym today) that makes me wonder how people can demonize Red Hat, and praise Apple or IBM (at least we got StarOffice as LGPL from Sun). </soapbox> So, I take it Seth's SystemServices is probably going to get the nod at this point, since it looks like initng is one of those "are we there yet?" Correct me if I'm wrong. > Luke Macken (lmacken@xxxxxxxxxx) may be looking at some of this > in the near future. As I said, I've got up to 10 hours/week to give assistance. I would be nice to see Red Hat leapfrog a lot of distros on the init, and set the standard for the next generation of Linux distros. > At first, I expect there to be very little UI code here; what's > needed is the framework. Yep, I got that from your forward. That is more in the future when the back-end is actually working. -- Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
