On 2014-06-07 03:34, Linda Walsh wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
You could instead volunteer to maintain systemv, and then everybody would benefit from being able to install it. Systemv is not in the distribution because nobody wanted to maintain it...
---- That wasn't my impression -- I never saw that listed as a reason for axing it -- but that it would be incompat with systemd.
I did. Many times.
Given how many projects and support things are axed by systemd, the scope of supporting sysV init is "unknown" -- Until systemd damage has leveled off, it's hard to say whether or not it is maintainable.
The scope is the same as it ever was. Of course, you also have to convince other projects, which now use things from systemd, to also work with your systemv package. You have to provide them with the new features that they now need, that systemv did not have.
At the very least suse could have NOT put in bogus-crippled versions of the SysV packages to ensure that trying to use them would bring grief. (Werner!)
You are obtuse. That package is there for the contrary reason, not to break packages that expect systemv to be there. For the same reason, for instance, that the postfix package still contains a 'sendmail' binary. It is a compatibility package, not a crippled package. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)