[arch-general] When will Arch switch to Upstart

[C Anthony Risinger]

On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Yaro Kasear <yaro at marupa.net> wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 19, 2011 12:53:44 pm C Anthony Risinger wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Yaro Kasear <yaro at marupa.net> wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, January 19, 2011 04:29:02 am Laurent Carlier wrote:
>> >> Le mercredi 19 janvier 2011 11:16:41, Jelle van der Waa a écrit :
>> >> > On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 14:50 +0700, Madhur Ahuja wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > If you want the devs to get interested in a new feature, atleast
>> >> > provide them with something to test and with arguments, cause you
>> >> > gave none...
>> >>
>> >> And "ubuntu use it" is not enough as an argument :-)
>> >
>> > In my opinion: "Ubuntu uses it" is a very strong reason NOT to use
>> > Upstart.
>>
>> you are trolling? comments related to Ubuntu or their competence are
>> wholly unrelated and highly irrelevant.
>>
>> i would guess that many of Arch's users began with Ubuntu, and then
>> decided they were too l33t and wanted to try something more bare metal
>> (probably to learn/grow); myself included.
>>
>> please try to restrict information output to quality discussion of
>> sysvinit, upstart, systemd, or other init solutions and their merits.
>>
>> C Anthony
>
> No, I'm not trolling. I don't see how my statement is really all that
> different than all the other one-line "god, I hope not" responses in this
> thread. I just gave my reasons, that's the only difference between my post and
> theirs.

your right, it isn't any different; it's equally pointless.

> The Ubuntu devs are behind
> Upstart, they're not that great at what they do when it comes to the actual
> system side of Ubuntu. Therefore why should we consider Upstart an
> improvement.

> It was entirely about the quality of Upstart as it
> was about the quality of Upstart's developers. And any programmer worth his
> salt could tell you that if you suck at programming or even just design, your
> software is going to suck, too.

so what if they wrote it... Ubuntu has contributed to the community in
many ways, please respect them.  you are making a false connection.
Upstart != Ubuntu.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

[ from my previous links (Lennart) ]
"To begin with, let me emphasize that I actually like the code of
Upstart, it is very well commented and easy to follow. It's certainly
something other projects should learn from (including my own).  That
being said, I can't say I agree with the general approach of Upstart."

> Arch's current init system is perfectly fine, it's simple, easy to work with,
> flexible, and its fast enough.

please see my previous post because sysvinit provides nothing.  you
are talking about bash.

> I can EASILY set up entirely new bootlevels
> with SysV on Arch (I did it with XBMC and I bet you my next lunch Upstart
> can't do it.), something Upstart goes out of its way to avoid.

run levels are 99% pointless constructs.  even Arch barely cares about them.

> Don't crappify Arch just
> because you miss Ubuntu or think Arch should jump on some misguided bandwagon
> that takes Linux ass-backwards.

please actually _read_ my posts and the links provided... then simmer down.

i am full-force behind Systemd for several reasons i clearly outlined,
not Upstart, though i commend Upstart for the initiative.  please
contribute quality information or leave the conversation to the
professional developers/administrators among use, not those who can't
do anything but bang out a POS 17 line bash script.

C Anthony