On 14 August 2012 11:58, Jelle van der Waa <jelle@vdwaa.nl> wrote:
On 08/14/12 17:55, Calvin Morrison wrote:
On 14 August 2012 10:57, Stéphane Gaudreault <stephane@archlinux.org> wrote:
Systemd has a overall better design than SysV, lots of useful administrative features and provide quicker boot up. Considering that it has been around in our repositories for some time and that it could be considered stable enough for production use, I would suggest to replace iniscript by systemd once the 'Missing systemd units' is over. Thus we will avoid duplicating our efforts on two init systems.
Any objections to start the migration process ?
Cheers,
Stéphane
I'd love to see the overall advantages and disadvantages of each of those fleshed out on a page where I can read them - I know I can't order anyone to do it, and my comment doesn't effect the outcome, but I would really like to see a good explanation of the advantages in an unbiased (aka not by LP) explanation of why it is better for arch. Is systemd suckless? is it easy to maintain? is it going to around for several years? have we considered Upstart? what about OpenRC?
before Arch jump ship, I would love to see some good details. I have been trying to keep up Tom's posts on the general, so maybe I should revisit them.
Calvin
Tom has listed the advantages a couple of times in arch-general.
-- Jelle van der Waa
I remember seeing the comparisons against SysV but not at all against upstart or OpenRC