On Ma, 18 nov 14, 23:12:48, Miles Fidelman wrote: > > I still don't think I'm seeing your point. Mail servers, and servers in > general need to be initialized, usually rely on the o/s init system, and > generally come packaged with a collection of init and utility scripts. To > date, every single major server we rely on, for a relatively standard > collection of web, mail, list, and database servers comes stock with ONLY > sysvinit scripts. > > To me, that's "caring" about the init system. Can you elaborate on what you > mean by "don't care?" ... > Again, this seems like a backwards perspective. When I put on my product > manager's hat (which I've done at one time in my life), from a developer's > point of view, one generally tries to develop for cross-platform > compatibility. Having to package, or be packaged for a specific environment > is a major inconvenience - especially when said packaging relies on human > beings. From an upstream point of view, the goal is to develop for the > least-common-denominator that's supported across the broadest range > platforms used by one's target users.
You've answered your own question. Currently sysv *is* the least common denominator. > From an upstream perspective, increased use of systemd, just makes lives > more difficult - once can no longer count on simply including a set of > sysvinit scripts with confidence that they'll just work. At a minimum, they > have to start worrying about incompatibilities between their init scripts > and systemd's implementation of sysvinit. Assuming there are any. > Beyond that, they have to either > rely on packagers, or start including systemd service files. That just > strikes me as a less desirable situation - more things to go wrong, more > people and steps in the delivery chain. Service files are incredibly easy to write *and* they already provide a sysvinit script, so it's not like their software is unusable on systemd unless they provide one. As packages in Debian will gain .service files (in addition to sysvinit scripts) I expect at least a large portion of these to be submitted upstream, as any diligent Debian package maintainer should do, so you'll see more and more of them, at least for active upstream/packager combinations. Why do the work when the distributions can do it for you? ;) Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic http://nuvreauspam.ro/gpg-transition.txt
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
