Debian to vote on init system... again

by
in linux on (#2TEV)
Ian Jackson is at it again.

A proposal has been submitted in the Debian vote mailing list to ensure that the next version of Debian, Jessie, will not require any specific init system. This comes after the Debian technical committee (TC) already decided in February to adopt systemd as the default init system for Jessie. The TC had left the door open for a general resolution to decide whether other init systems would be supported in Jessie. At this time, it appears that enough support has been garnered for the proposal to ensure that there will be a vote on this issue. From the text of the proposal:
This GR seeks to preserve the freedom of our users now to select an init system of their choice, and the project's freedom to select a different init system in the future. It will avoid Debian becoming accidentally locked in to a particular init system (for example, because so much unrelated software has ended up depending on a particular init system that the burden of effort required to change init system becomes too great). A number of init systems exist, and it is clear that there is not yet broad consensus as to what the best init system might look like.
When the TC debated the issue, keeping SysVinit was an unpopular opinion. The two real contenders were systemd and upstart, and there seemed to be a general agreement that the init system must change. Is this vote an attempt to delay the inevitable? Let's remember that the reason the TC had to vote on this issue is that the developers wanted to be set on which init system to support. Could this resolution end with Debian "supporting" other init systems as second-class citizen, with many developers choosing not to bother supporting anything that's not systemd?

Re: The GR doesn't attempt to change the default init for Jessie (Score: 0)

by Anonymous Coward on 2014-10-20 19:50 (#2TH9)

The idea of there being one init system to rule them all and in the darkness bind them I think has a LOT to do with negative attitudes toward systemd in the first place. If Poettering could spend more time coding and less time actively seeking the destruction of other functional, stable, and good software (before having anything all that stable/functional to replace it with, in many cases), he'd be a lot more welcome in my book. Pulseaudio works great when you need what it has to offer, and while there may be quirks about it I'd like to see done otherwise, well...that's hardly something I'd have much place complaining about not producing something that does what it does to replace it with. What doesn't work great is when you take out an underlying functionality and replace it with something unfinished and broken. When you simultaneously make going back purposely difficult or impossible, it's even more insidious.

I seriously hope he mellows out as he gets older. This "aint monoculture neat?" trend really is getting quite old, and for someone who apparently can make decent software tools FOR THOSE THAT WANT THEM, he really is wasting that on playing this Borg-ish villain role.

In any case, I'll keep using my SysV setup with BSD-style init scripts and pulseaudio and enjoying an open Linux environment while it lasts. Hopefully Debian can figure out a reasonable way to navigate the path ahead with some grace...it'd be a shame to see them dashed on the rocks by this state of affairs.
Post Comment
Subject
Comment
Captcha
Enter the number sixteen thousand two hundred and ninety eight in digits: