[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: systemd stance
Mitt Green wrote:
You've probably heard of all these systemd rants, which are
especially rough in Debian community.
I think they are mostly justified rants and debian got ruined. An
occasion to "stand up" against that Borg-like startup system,
de-unixifying, full of bloat and dependencies.
We are having a thread discussing Unix distributions
that have made their decision not to go with systemd
(all threads available at lists.dyne.org). Since systemd
is made for Linux-only (and glibc also I believe), do
you have any opinions on it, regarding NetBSD future
and at all?
I see two issues here:
1) what do do about stuff that depends on systemd (e.g. gnome and
related apps). This was actually one of the reasons why Debian brought
2) You may not like systemd approach, but a more modern startup system
can be done: better dependencies, delayed/background starts,
parallelism, etc etc. Already Gentoo has OpenRC which is very nice, but
not such a monstrum as systemd. Darwin/MacOS have launchd... which isn't
slim either, but quite fast in startup.
What we have with sysinit is proven, but I think BSD has to come up in
the long run with a fine solution, in unix and BSD style,
self-contained, based up on simple text files (plists? not big XML
stuff which then needs dependencies), easy to configure, small,
portable. The question is of course if certain software will *require*
Main Index |
Thread Index |