Hi, Colin Watson <cjwat...@debian.org> writes: > Reservations with systemd > ------------------------- [...] > Basically, systemd would be more compelling to me if it tried to do > less. I don't expect to persuade systemd advocates of this, as I think > it amounts to different basic views of the world, but the basic approach > here is probably the single biggest factor influencing my position.
On the other hand even when using upstart as an init replacement, we'll continue to use large chunks of systemd (logind, other dbus services). I personally think "less is more" would only be a convincing argument if we actually would not need the aditional features. I also have one question: your mail doesn't mention the integration problems with logind into a system that uses upstart and not systemd as init. Do you think this will not be an issue? Given it means ongoing work instead of a one-time investment, this is one of my main gripes with upstart. I feel that minor technical differences between the init replacements are not work committing to long-time maintaince of a systemd-logind branch that works outside of systemd. There are more interesting areas we can invest our resources into. Note that this might also include session management functions in the future. As you mentioned yourself in [1], DEs are looking into using advanced session supervision. So far both kwin and GNOME seem to target systemd for this. So this would be another area that we would need to invest resources into to maintain an upstart replacement. [1] <https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/01/msg00017.html> Ansgar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87r48rwsp8....@deep-thought.43-1.org
