Latest Round Of Debian Systemd vs. Upstart Voting Ends

[erendorn]

I followed the discussion until mid Jan and I think the animosity towards Steve is mostly presumptive. He and the other Canonical affiliated person have been quite tame in most of their assessments. It's Ian Jackson who's been very political and rather combative throughout the bugreport.

That was my impression too.

[GreatEmerald]

Eh, I'm not sure. Yes, Jackson is very persistent and political, but Langasek also had his fair share, especially when you look at his comments on GNOME and Josselin Mouette.

[GreatEmerald]

Well, some very interesting developments today. First off, many TC members seem to be figuring out what they really want in the T/L question (which was really proposed rather prematurely and pushed mostly by Jackson alone). Their current proposals (by both Allbery and Langasek) are really quite acceptable. Except to Jackson, I'd expect.
Second off, Bdale Garbee is such a maverick: https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte.../msg00281.html This will make Jackson even less pleased. But probably most TC members will be like "oh what the heck, might as well" and not oppose this.

In related news, I got the cross-examination format going for the second case: http://aceattorney.sparklin.org/jeu.php?id_proces=57899

[intellivision]

i said nothing about openrc. still, 'has successfully booted' is irrelevant, because sysvinit also has succesfully booted. but it was booted by modifying target kernel, i.e. by porting kernel to init, not init to kernel.

However sysvinit wasn't portable to the level that OpenRC currently is, and sysvinit doesn't support advanced Linux kernel features such as cgroups, while OpenRC does.
And IIRC, at least with the Dragonfly BSD port, there was no need to modify the host OS's code in order to make the init system boot.
So on all those points, you're wrong, and I hope you'll refrain from being so in the future.

[pal666]

However sysvinit wasn't portable to the level that OpenRC currently is, and sysvinit doesn't support advanced Linux kernel features such as cgroups, while OpenRC does.
And IIRC, at least with the Dragonfly BSD port, there was no need to modify the host OS's code in order to make the init system boot.
So on all those points, you're wrong, and I hope you'll refrain from being so in the future.

kid, i didn't say anything about openrc in general or about its portability in particular. i only said your argument is wrong and i can repeat it. you failed again, your strawman is pathetic

[intellivision]

kid, i didn't say anything about openrc in general or about its portability in particular. i only said your argument is wrong and i can repeat it. you failed again, your strawman is pathetic

And now you're trying to derail the argument by pushing it off topic from a technical discussion of OpenRC, typical avoidance manoeuvre.
If you didn't want to discuss OpenRC, then you should have simply said so.