[arch-general] When will Arch switch to Upstart

[Jelle van der Waa]

On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 13:33 -0600, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Yaro Kasear <yaro at marupa.net> wrote:
> > On Wednesday, January 19, 2011 12:53:44 pm C Anthony Risinger wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Yaro Kasear <yaro at marupa.net> wrote:
> >> > On Wednesday, January 19, 2011 04:29:02 am Laurent Carlier wrote:
> >> >> Le mercredi 19 janvier 2011 11:16:41, Jelle van der Waa a écrit :
> >> >> > On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 14:50 +0700, Madhur Ahuja wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > If you want the devs to get interested in a new feature, atleast
> >> >> > provide them with something to test and with arguments, cause you
> >> >> > gave none...
> >> >>
> >> >> And "ubuntu use it" is not enough as an argument :-)
> >> >
> >> > In my opinion: "Ubuntu uses it" is a very strong reason NOT to use
> >> > Upstart.
> >>
> >> you are trolling? comments related to Ubuntu or their competence are
> >> wholly unrelated and highly irrelevant.
> >>
> >> i would guess that many of Arch's users began with Ubuntu, and then
> >> decided they were too l33t and wanted to try something more bare metal
> >> (probably to learn/grow); myself included.
> >>
> >> please try to restrict information output to quality discussion of
> >> sysvinit, upstart, systemd, or other init solutions and their merits.
> >>
> >> C Anthony
> >
> > No, I'm not trolling. I don't see how my statement is really all that
> > different than all the other one-line "god, I hope not" responses in this
> > thread. I just gave my reasons, that's the only difference between my post and
> > theirs.
> 
> your right, it isn't any different; it's equally pointless.
> 
> > The Ubuntu devs are behind
> > Upstart, they're not that great at what they do when it comes to the actual
> > system side of Ubuntu. Therefore why should we consider Upstart an
> > improvement.
> 
> > It was entirely about the quality of Upstart as it
> > was about the quality of Upstart's developers. And any programmer worth his
> > salt could tell you that if you suck at programming or even just design, your
> > software is going to suck, too.
> 
> so what if they wrote it... Ubuntu has contributed to the community in
> many ways, please respect them.  you are making a false connection.
> Upstart != Ubuntu.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
> 
> [ from my previous links (Lennart) ]
> "To begin with, let me emphasize that I actually like the code of
> Upstart, it is very well commented and easy to follow. It's certainly
> something other projects should learn from (including my own).  That
> being said, I can't say I agree with the general approach of Upstart."
> 
> > Arch's current init system is perfectly fine, it's simple, easy to work with,
> > flexible, and its fast enough.
> 
> please see my previous post because sysvinit provides nothing.  you
> are talking about bash.
> 
> > I can EASILY set up entirely new bootlevels
> > with SysV on Arch (I did it with XBMC and I bet you my next lunch Upstart
> > can't do it.), something Upstart goes out of its way to avoid.
> 
> run levels are 99% pointless constructs.  even Arch barely cares about them.
> 
> > Don't crappify Arch just
> > because you miss Ubuntu or think Arch should jump on some misguided bandwagon
> > that takes Linux ass-backwards.
> 
> please actually _read_ my posts and the links provided... then simmer down.
> 
> i am full-force behind Systemd for several reasons i clearly outlined,
> not Upstart, though i commend Upstart for the initiative.  please
> contribute quality information or leave the conversation to the
> professional developers/administrators among use, not those who can't
> do anything but bang out a POS 17 line bash script.
> 
> C Anthony

Could all ubuntu trolls/ranters leave the building? 

I mean 90% of the emails in this thread are just about ubuntu versus the
world, this whole hate/rage/rant thread won't make the devs enthusiastic
for upstart. 

Package upstart, create a forum thread, gather some evidence that it
could be implemented easy in the archlinux and then take it too the
devs. (If they would still be interested after all this 16 year old
behaviour :P )

happy hacking, 

-- 
Jelle van der Waa
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/attachments/20110119/203329a9/attachment-0001.asc>