On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 17:54:26 +0200
al3xu5 via Dng <dng@???> wrote:

> Wed, 11 Oct 2023 09:25:40 -0300 - altoid via Dng <dng@???>:
>
> > [...]
> >
> > This episode is just the visible tip of an ongoing trend directed at
> > cementing Poettering's abortion of nature firmly in the role of Linux
> > ecosystem's *only* viable init software.
> >
> > Sooner than later, there will be little or no software to be run on
> > non-systemd Linux distributions and then it will be too late.
> >
> > While all this is happening, Linux dev/maintainers etc. have
> > evidently not come to terms with that inescapable fact.
>
> I totally agree.
>
> > And *insist* on the idea of multiple options for Linux init software
> > instead uniting behind *one* in line with the basic Linux philosophy
> > we all know.
> >
> > The only way to survive what is going on these days within the Linux
> > ecosystem is to pool *all* available resources to be able to resist
> > and have a chance at survival.
>
> Again, I totally agree.
>
> The init-system diversity project could be one chance.
> Also runit or c6 could be chances (to me c6 seems the best).
>
> If I understand correctly (given my not too in-depth knowledge of the
> subject):
> - if runit, efforts should be oriented towards including all the most common
> services (and perhaps also the less common ones) in runit-services;
> - if s6, a collection of service directory is needed also in this case
> including all the most common services (and perhaps also the less common
> ones);
> - a possible 2-step procedure should also be considered (?): once having
> runit-services including all the stuff, should be relatively easy porting
> to s6.
>
> Did I get it right? It's correct?
>
>
> Anyway, I agree that it would be necessary to move towards one and *only* one
> direction in which to concentrate efforts, asking those who are able to
> contribute.

Hi,

I would suggest instead rather than orphan-sysvinit-scripts, s6 scripts, runit scripts,
who knows scripts... to create a collection of definition files per service
with the needed variables (needs, provides, daemon, options to run in foreground,
options to run in background, options to log, options for pidfile, run as user, run as group,
you name it option, option I forgot, runit_specific_options, s6_specific_options) that could be
sourced by sysv, runit, s6 and others to avoid duplication of effort and don't
waste manpower.
This would be a pain in the a** for the systemd coalition because it would make us
really independent from them at least until they will start to modify daemons
or the C library to check you have that particular cryptographic signature....
Just my 2 cents.

Ciao,
Tito

> I wouldn't know what to do to make it happen.
>
> Could the resources of those who develop and collaborate with Devuan be
> sufficient? I hope so, but I doubt it.
>
> In any case, perhaps public incitement from a person whose
> authority (even non-technical) is widely recognized could help to give birth
> to a project capable of being a concrete hope.
>
> > Just a chance, not guaranteed.
>
> Indeed.
>
> > Like I have noted more than once: there are huge shitloads of moolah
> > behind this systemd putsch.
> >
> > You *do* know where Poettering is working now, right?
> >
> > "Linux is a cancer that attaches itself in an intellectual property
> > sense to everything it touches"
> > Ex Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer - Chicago Sun-Times - June 1, 2001.
>
> Oh... Sure... But that's not the only cause... The devil's army has many
> soldiers and powerful weapons...
>
> Regards
> alexus
>
>