-upstart subpackage vs tranditional initscripts
a.badger at gmail.com
Wed Jun 2 21:02:51 UTC 2010
On Wed, Jun 02, 2010 at 01:43:10PM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > We wanted to make the transition from sysv to systemd very easy, and I
> > think this is the simplemost scheme we could come up with. During a
> > transition period packages should just ship both files and it'll work
> > with both init systems.
> This is not the first time this has been said.
> Even though there may not be an initiative to switch from sysv to
> upstart, why do you feel so strongly that people will switch from sysv
> to systemd? Are you going to implement a Fedora policy that bans sysv,
> say, in Fedora 16? That's about the only way you could make it happen.
Well.... one of the reasons that we are still using sysvinit compatibility
for upstart is that people have been actively told not to switch to native
upstart scripts. So our current situation is not really an indicator of
what to expect with a new init system where we actively tell people to
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100602/52e90eda/attachment.bin
More information about the devel