On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Roger Leigh <rle...@codelibre.net> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:04:32PM -0300, Fernando Lemos wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Thomas Goirand <z...@debian.org> wrote:
>> > On 04/30/2012 04:56 AM, Fernando Lemos wrote:
>> >> I agree that OpenRC would be an improvement over the status
>> >> quo, but migrating *away* from OpenRC later on would be a major pain
>> >> as we would have to support both LSB/sysvinit scripts and OpenRC
>> >> service descriptions for the foreseeable future.
>> >>
>> > Ah? Is this any different with other alternatives like
>> > upstart or systemd?
>>
>> Yes. The kernel isn't getting any less event-based, so OpenRC would be
>> an interim solution.
>
> Unless OpenRC itself could become more event-based.

How realistic is that?


-- 
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/canvyna-jrxkfeicsvhz2mzbe-4nldkfqmfmyex5bdb+uf8g...@mail.gmail.com

Reply via email to