Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (710 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-factory] The road to systemd for openSUSE 12.1
On Monday 20 June 2011 11:37:54 Stephan Kulow wrote:
Am Montag, 20. Juni 2011 schrieb Jos Poortvliet:
On Monday 20 June 2011 10:40:26 Dr. Werner Fink wrote:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 07:43:12PM +0200, Kay Sievers wrote:
I'd like to know what the big vendors are thinking about this.
Introducing risks due lazy/snooty systemd developers can not be
a reason to ignore well-founded and common rules how to handle
big severs.

Most of the 'lazy/snooty systemd developers' work for the biggest
vendors. :)

Does this mean that IBM will enforce that /usr and
other useful partitions will be only avaiable by
using initramfs?

Since when does IBM ship openSUSE?

How does this matter? systemd wants to be one for all linux and this is
about openSUSE wanting systemd. So in this context, we need to look at
other uses of linux in general and openSUSE based distributions
specifically.

And actually most of the requests what systemd should do come from
these vendors and their customers. We declined more requests form
them than we have implemented so far.

Defer would be OK, but declined is not that what will
help to become systemd accepted as replacement on top
of most big servers.

openSUSE doesn't run on big servers so what is the issue? It might be an

How do you know?

issue for SLES but that's not expected for another two years and I'm sure
SUSE can solve that issue if they want to.

While this is politically correct, SUSE engineers are a huge part of
openSUSE, so their concerns are pratically openSUSE concerns too.

Please keep the openSUSE and SUSE discussions separate.

You want SUSE engineers to shutup in openSUSE? You can't be serious.

No, I want to have product management in SUSE care about SLES. If they need
features for corporate customers, fine, but openSUSE doesn't have to wait for
that if we don't want to.

and OK, I admit I was being a tad too black and white, surely SUSE concerns
should be part of the discussion here...

But in this case, as the discussion is complicated enough as it is, it'd be
nice if SUSE could figure out what they want before pulling in two directions
at once... There shuldn't be a secret, internal cabal saying we go for systemd
and screw the community but we could de-clutter the discussion a bit here. If
SUSE wants certain features, it either should commit to implementing them, or
keep sysv maintained next to systemd or whatever...

Greetings, Stephan
< Previous Next >
This Thread