On Jan 19, 2011 7:13 PM, "Ng Oon-Ee" <ngoonee@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 17:22 -0600, Thomas Dziedzic wrote:
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Laurent Carlier <lordheavym@gmail.com>
wrote:
Le mercredi 19 janvier 2011 16:02:52, C Anthony Risinger a écrit :
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 3:59 PM, C Anthony Risinger <anthony@extof.me
wrote:
Any ideas when will Arch switch to systemd based booting system ?
oh, and the last couple pages in the forum sound promising in regards to arch specific unit files, though i'd have to look closer as i haven't had a chance to try systemd myself for some time.
any comments from someone out there currently using systemd and the arch unit files from AUR?
C Anthony
Let me resume:
Currently there is no plan and no date.
++
I'm not convinced systemd is better than the current initscripts in its current state. I've seen problems from people using systemd in the forums and in other sources. You should work on improving systemd on arch and getting everything documented if you really do like it.
+1
I've been observing the systemd thread, seems really interesting (conceptually and practically). Will have to try it someday, when I've graduated and the cost of an unbootable system becomes less heavy =)
I will likely put time into this when possible, but that's not very soon; I have another Arch related project with btrfs that I've delayed too long. As for being better... I think the links provided to Lennart's blog explain that fairly well. 200 line bash scripts become 15 line service files. I was hoping to hear from someone currently using/trying the systemd related AUR packages, because some of the posts in the forum are very positive, and allude to good Arch specific support/experiences. ... so, anyone out there to support or refute this observation (with actual experience ...) C Anthony [mobile]