> SysV init scripts are here for ages
They were large, inconsistent, and burdensome to maintain. The people
who maintained them decided that there was a better option.
If you are willing to maintain them, then you can do the work to provide
an alternate init system.
If you're not doing the work, then at some point you have to trust that
the people who are doing the work know better than you do.
> We have lot of alternatives in Linux system (several desktop WMs etc)
> already, alternative init is in this case (IMO) just small piece of all
> system SW.
init is a small piece of code, yes. But it's not just code, it's an
interface. Lots of programs interface with systemd. If you want an
alternative, you have to address all of those dependencies.
Even on Distrowatch for a good while, systemd has encouraged comments both + and -.
Now there is a new alternative to systemd
see RancherOS
http://rancher.com/rancher-os/
``Eliminates need for complex init systems
RancherOS eliminates the need for complex init systems like systemd. Systemd and Docker
don’t work well together as they both attempt to manage control groups. Using a simple
configuration file, administrators can easily configure system services as Docker
containers.''
I am actually surprised and puzzled by this! I thought Fedora was bleeding edge* and was
the pioneer of new technologies* but now someone else is leading the init* technologies.
Yes there was upstart by ubuntu, there is uslessD, and other non systemd software out
there but these guys they may have a mission*
Debian--> Devuan
Fedora --> Fedoruan?
Hope no one is offended. I am just watching on the sidelines, but I do see Fedora losing
ground, Debian also loosing longtime users because of init* technologies getting in
users' ways.
Best Regards,
Antonio
____________________________________________________________
FREE 3D MARINE AQUARIUM SCREENSAVER - Watch dolphins, sharks & orcas on your desktop!
Check it out at
http://www.inbox.com/marineaquarium