systemd (Was Re: tmpfs for strategic directories)

[Scott James Remnant]

On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 18:14 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:

> Oh come on. Thanks for turning this into something personal.
> 
You did that last week - I got forwarded logs from #systemd.  That's
probably why I wasn't in a great mood with you this morning ;-)

> I'd prefer it we would keep this discussion purely technical. Everything
> else does not help at all in this matter.
> 
I think you're wrong, you think I'm wrong; let's go shopping :-)

I only jumped in to refute your comment that you'd talked to me, and I
hadn't listened, because that was incorrect.


I'm not sure there's any point in technical discussion about the
relative merits of our two approaches at this point, since you've
already *written* systemd and you're already pushing for inclusion in
distributions, and I'm continuing to develop Upstart and already have it
in distributions.

So what we've ended up with is two different systems, and one can assume
that roughly half the distributions will end up with one, and another
half with the other.

At least we have the common standard of the LSB Init Scripts that both
will support.

Scott
-- 
Scott James Remnant
scott at canonical.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100526/a1340b46/attachment.bin