[Fed-Devel] Re: SYSTEMD: Give us a option for upstart

Rahul Sundaram metherid at gmail.com
Tue Jun 14 09:49:32 UTC 2011

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? 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


More information about the devel mailing list