On Fri, 2007-04-06 at 20:02 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Patrice Dumas wrote: > > > > I may be wrong, but I don't think that any user will chose another init > > system than the default init system unknowingly. > > The problem is not that the user would unknowingly install a different > init system (They could install any packages without understanding it > but that is not a init system specific issue so we needn't discuss that > in this thread). > > The problem is that users wouldn't know that the init system they are > installing wont work with several packages because these don't provide > the init scripts that work with the alternative init system they just > installed. If basic integration was not done, the alternative init > system would result in non-functional packages, crashes or worse non > booting systems. > che can correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the user of a new init system such as initng has to install the new init *and* manually configure the commandline in grub to boot with the alternate init. So I really think you're overstating the "non-functionalness" here. Moreover, since SysVinit is nearly impossible to remove from the system without pulling an esr, if I "break" it, all I have to do to unbreak it is edit the grub entry and remove the init= line. -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
