OpenRC supports a lot of platforms.

Technically, OpenRC solves the problem of sysvinit in every way. Centralized scripts, tree based dependencies, service supervision on some level, and parallel start up of multiple service trees.

Nothing systemd offers other than mediocre code, bad designs, and destructive is useful on any level.

Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: Jaret Cantu<mailto:jaret@realitysend.com>
Sent: ‎5/‎23/‎2015 3:09 PM
To: dng@???<mailto:dng@lists.dyne.org>
Subject: Re: [Dng] Slackware systemd creepin in maybe?

On 05/23/2015 05:54 PM, Nuno Magalhães wrote:
> There's a UNIX ecosystem? The Linux ecosystem may become strictly
> commercial and be used to hunt baby seals, but the BSD and Solaris
> ecosystems are still systemd-free, are they not?

That is one of the arguments against systemd and its seepage (a more
appropriate word than creeping!); systemd is geared entirely to the
Linux kernel with its hard requirements for features like cgroups.
(Also, specifically geared towards Linux DE.)
Thus, systemd cannot even be used on non-Linux systems (or, if it can,
only in a stripped down, impotent form).

In fact, if you look at the Debian packaging files, there are already
exceptions to install around systemd when using the BSD or Hurd kernels.

That really makes the systemd default even more confusing for Debian; it
isn't the default init system for every architecture? (Is that was
kfreebsd is considered in Debian's eyes?) and it cannot be since systemd
doesn't work on those kernels, so Debian essentially has to maintain
*multiple* default init systems as long as they support kfreebsd or want
to support hurd.

It would have been much less of a maintenance burden to just pick one
that worked for every supported platform.



~jaret
_______________________________________________
Dng mailing list
Dng@???
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng