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