One more thing... On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 02:08:00PM +0000, Jon Dowland wrote: > On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 10:12:43AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > But I do think that writing portable software isn't that hard, and that not > > doing it is pure lazyness. > > It's not about difficulty, systemd isn't not-portable simply because the > authors haven't got around to it yet; it fundamentally relies on a Linux-only > technology.
This is wrong. An init implementation is not fundamentally Linux-only. No matter how they chose to implement it, no matter what they've ended up with, it is fundamentally possible to write an init implementation that will work on more than just Linux. It is perfectly possible to make an init implementation that uses Linux-only technologies on Linux, but which falls back to a different mode on non-Linux. The reasl reason why systemd is Linux-only is because systemd upstream decided it would be easier to implement systemd that way, and because they didn't care about non-Linux. I find that to be lazyness; but that is, of course, their prerogative. At any rate, I think the only solution to the dilemma here would seem to be if someone were to port systemd to kFreeBSD. If neither the kFreeBSD people nor the systemd people are willing to work on that, then we can discuss and talk about this into eternity, but it will be highly unlikely that we'll ever arrive at a solution. kFreeBSD is already part of Debian. Systemd is not. The answer would seem to be obvious. -- The volume of a pizza of thickness a and radius z can be described by the following formula: pi zz a -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120306152356.ge15...@grep.be
