On Sat, 1 Feb 2014 19:11:52 -0500 (EST)
Thilos Rich wrote:
> Init should be simple, secure, and get out of the way. It should not take
> over the system. We should not be forced to use an init that does.
>
> This man said it best:
> wizardofbits.tumblr.com/post/45232318557/systemd-more-like-shi
I made an example script that could serve as a starting point for
controlling all services. User/Admin can override functions from this
script to make custom behavior and configure it in a config file.
It probably doesn't work, but for now it's enough to read it because
it's self-explaining and il
On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:50:54 +
Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> The sysvinit page doesn't have a specific maintainer/advocate. It is a
> collection of opinions from discussion on debian-devel@ and elsewhere.
> Other camps have already responded to parts they don't agree with.
>
> Unless any volu
On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 18:42:43 +0800
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> With the above, it's easy to switch from one to the other. Well, that is
> before the mess with the version-depends on sysv-rc introduced by the
> debhelper thing for upstart, which messed-up a few things... I hope many
> packages have be
On Fri, 08 Nov 2013 16:30:28 +0100
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 11/08/2013 02:54 PM, Marko Randjelovic wrote:
> > Additional arguments in favor of sysvinit:
> >
> > * systemd and upstart lead to vendor lock-in; it will be complicated
> > later to return bac
Additional arguments in favor of sysvinit:
* systemd and upstart lead to vendor lock-in; it will be complicated
later to return back or change to third option, as well to change from
first to second option
* I don't have a feeling that configuration can be very simpler than
shell scripts; there a
6 matches
Mail list logo
