Joel Roth <joelz@???> writes:

> Steve Litt wrote:
>>    Katolaz
>> > IMHO, if and when we would like to make a change regarding init
>> > systems, that change should not be to replace sysvinit with an init
>> > system of *our* choice, but probably towards allowing users to use the
>> > non-invasive init of *their* choice.

>>
>> Yes. The user should have an easy choice of inits. What I meant was
>> that SOME init must be default, and if that default init is ever not
>> sysvinit, it should be something very different from sysvinit.
>
> e.g. something without the complex run levels and symlink farms
> of sysvinit.

The "complex run-levels and symlink farms" are completely unrelated to
sysvinit. That's a program which invokes a configurable command with a
certain argument upon a 'run-level change request'. This program is
usually /etc/init.d/rc and that uses symlinks to init.d scripts in
directories whose names a derived from run-level numbers in order to
work out a list of other programs which are to be executed with certain
arguments upon a run-level change. If this bothers you, you can replace
/etc/init.d/rc with any other program of your liking.