On Saturday 15 Feb 2014 17:32:44 Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: > On Feb 15, 2014 11:02 AM, "Tanstaafl" <tansta...@libertytrek.org> wrote: > > On 2014-02-15 10:16 AM, Tanstaafl <tansta...@libertytrek.org> wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> Not to revive a flame-fest against systemd, but... > >> > >> I'm sure some or most of you have already heard about this, but I found > >> a really decent thread discussing this whole systemd thing. It is only > >> really comparing systemd and upstart, as that was the debate going on in > >> the debian TC, but it is a great read, and has actually made me rethink > >> my blind objections to systemd a bit. > > > > One of which was logging: > > > > "20. Myth: systemd makes it impossible to run syslog. > > > > Not true, we carefully made sure when we introduced the journal that all > > data is also passed on to any syslog daemon running. In fact, if something > changed, then only that syslog gets more complete data now than it got > before, since we now cover early boot stuff as well as STDOUT/STDERR of any > system service." > > > From: http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html > > Also, for those of you who don't follow Linux-related news, Ubuntu will > also change to systemd in the future: > > http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1316 > > And I *heard* that Slackware was also discussing the possibility, but since > I don't follow Slackware at all, I don't know for sure. > > Anyway, distros not using systemd, and that they are not really small > and/or niche, seem to be disappearing. The discussion that Tanstaafl posted > is interesting since the arguments used by the four TC members are really > focused on the technical merits of the proposed init systems.
There was a thread sometime last year mentioning a slimmer/slicker and obeying to the *nix design principles initialisation system, but can't find it at the moment. Isn't that at all in the running? -- Regards, Mick
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
