I think it's clear he's talking about systemd when he says: "You all presumably know why."
Plus, there is some interesting comments from Teodore Tso talking about systemd in G+ https://plus.google.com/+TheodoreTso/posts/EJrEuxjR65J On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Steve Litt <sl...@troubleshooters.com> wrote: > What did Linux mean by "init"? A lot of people use the word "init" > synonomously with sysvinit, in which case this would appear to be bad > news for us. On the other hand, perhaps he use "init" to mean the init > system, regardless of brand. I can't tell from context. > > SteveT > > > On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 08:57:33 -0700 > Bruce Perens <br...@perens.com> wrote: > > > The entire paragraph is even more damning: > > > > And yes, a large part of this may be that I no longer feel like I can > > trust "init" to do the sane thing. You all presumably know why. > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 7:20 AM, Emiliano Marini > > <emilianomarin...@gmail.com > > > wrote: > > > > > I no longer feel like I can > > > trust "init" > > > > > > > > > > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/7/6/577 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Dng mailing list > > > Dng@lists.dyne.org > > > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Dng mailing list > Dng@lists.dyne.org > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng >
_______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
