2011/6/14 Rahul Sundaram <metherid(a)gmail.com>:
On 06/14/2011 03:15 PM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
> From experience... i prefer having two tools available atleast to do
> every single job (especially when they exist) because then i have an
> easy fallback if one fails. Having upstart installed on rawhide during
> the f15 rawhide cycles was quite helpful to work around boot bugs on
> the fly without having to debug stuff or ending up with a nonbooting
> system (which makes it hard to dig up ml threads with workarounds, or
> up or downgrading packages). As long as someone maintains it i see no
> reason to exclude upstart completly from the repos.
What do you about glibc bugs? Do you want to get them fixed or
include alternatives?
its been many years since i have seen a glibc bug that makes my system
completly unbootable. i have had various issues during the last devel
cycle where my system wouldnt boot anymore and upstart was a good
shorttime fallback. having an alternative doesent mean that bugs
should be covered instead fixed. i never proposed this and i am not
sure why you start off like that on me.
Having alternatives for each of the core
components is a costly affair. it isn't just about maintaining
upstart. It is also having to deal with two different type of init
configuration scattered across the system, differences in handling many
things including /etc/iniittab and /etc/fstab, having to maintain init
scripts or upstart configuration files in all the different packages in
addition to the systemd unit files and testing them regularly in the
development cycle to ensure that changes we make for systemd doesn't
impact negatively on upstart and so on. This is just silly.
We have to draw the line somewhere
I never proposed having alternatives for each of the core systems
either... There is already a viable alternative that works. inittab
contains atm exactly one line... the one with the default runlevel...
and /etc/fstab can be parsed differently if there are changes.
Also i do not understand the Argument with the unit files... they are
systemd related. upstart isnt affected. Since upstart isnt installed
by default anyways it also doesent matter for "critical path". Got a
hard time to follow your argumentation there. SystemV init scripts are
already present and work quite well aswell.
This is just silly.
Not commenting that.
We have to draw the line somewhere
Draw your line ;)
kind regards,
Rudolf Kastl