tomh0665 at gmail.com
Wed Dec 3 18:47:25 UTC 2014
On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Diego Germán Gonzalez
<diegogermangonzalez at gmail.com> wrote:
> El 02/12/14 a las 08:12, Tom H escibió:
>> Why would Ubuntu give its users a choice of init now when it hasn't in the
> Why use Unity when we always use Gnome?
> Why use LibreOffice when we always use OpenOffice?
> Why use Mir when we always use Xorg and all the rest will use Wayland?
> Again, I have no opinion about it, but something has not been done so far is
> not argument that can not be done in the future
As someone else has pointed out earlier in this thread, because having
a choice of inits generates a lot of development and QA work. That's
most probably why there are few distributions that offer such a
You're also not complaining about a lack of kernel choice and yet,
AFAIK, only Debian and Gentoo offer a non-Linux kernel.
You also don't have a choice of libc in any distribution except, again
AFAIK, in Gentoo - there's, for example, a musl libc variant.
So why this focus on init choice? What would we gain?
What I'm looking for in an init is that it boots a system and starts
services, as well as allow me to customize these two functions and
So I would've been happy had Ubuntu chosen to stick with upstart (or
even adopt launchd!) and I'm happy that it's chosen to move to
systemd. Unless you're working on developing an init or on the startup
of a particular service, you don't spend your time rebooting a system
or starting/stopping/restarting/reloading a daemon. It's not like
choosing to use Unity over Gnome, Chrome over Firefox, postfix over
exim, or vi over emacs; if all's well, you don't interact, as a
sysadmin or a user, with init. Furthermore, is there anything that
sysvinit or upstart can do that systemd can't? Not that I know of. The
entire "debate" is overly and unnecessarily emotional!
You've chosen to fork Debian because you dislike systemd. Why not?
We're all free to do just about anything. But joining this mailing
list in order to proselytize for your fork without even having a
functional iso to point to and then criticizing Ubuntu for choosing
not to have an init choice is rude.
More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss