3 ms·
Why is it misleading? Why if we had something safe and stable because of its age and refinement is that an excuse to stuff something less mature in its place?
by cestith 10y ago
Why is it misleading? Why if we had something safe and stable because of its age and refinement is that an excuse to stuff something less mature in its place?
Personally I like unit files rather than bespoke Bash scripts, I like dependency-driven parallel startup, and I like getting a daemon watchdog for free. That's about where I'd have ended the feature requests, though. I'd also like it to be roughly as secure as what it's replacing.
- qwertyuiop924 10y agoOpenRC (and to some extent, the BSDs), already have dep-driven startup, and OpenRC supports parallel startup. Also, with rc.subrs and whatever OpenRC calls it, the init files can be pretty damn descriptive, and very concise.
- JdeBP 10y agoFor the reasons given. Read again, properly. Pay particular attention to the statement that counting CVE listings is a silly approach. Then think, and consider that if that alone is silly, what must counting two sets of CVE listings from entirely different parts of two projects' lifetimes be. Then read on a find a whole lot of better questions to ask. For bonus points, try asking yourself them about various systems. (-: