4 ms·

See also: https://devuan.org/ https://devuan.org/ as well as #debianfork and #devuan on IRC/freenode

• fredoralive 12y ago
  That site does seem to show an odd disconnect, it seems to mention "init-freedom" alongside "...the first goal of removing systemd...". Surely true "init-freedom" would be to give the end user a choice between sysvinit, bsd init, sysmtemd, launchd, android's init, and so on. Of course such true init-freedom would be near impossible. IMO people should just pick one, forking appropriately, and stop having such huge arguments over something the average user neither knows nor cares about. Just call Devuan the sysvinit fork of Debian and see how it goes...
  • pekk 12y ago
    Removing coupling which effectively mandates the use of systemd is a prerequisite for "init-freedom". You can't offer a choice when everything requires systemd.
    • Ded7xSEoPKYNsDd 12y ago
      Compare to Gentoo. Gentoo defaults to their homegrown OpenRC. But Gentoo is all about choice and so systemd is an option and works perfectly well. That's "init-freedom". If someone doesn't like systemd and removes it from their distro, that's OK with me. But calling that "init-freedom" seems weird. Maybe they should call it something like "sysv-freedom", if that's what they mean.
      • digi_owl 12y ago
        Sadly the one thing that dissapears in this debate is that systemd has long since gone beyond being a init. For me the whole thing came to a head when i learned that consolekit (a bothersome thing on its own) was depreciated in favor of logind. And logind is tied to the hip of systemd. There are also issues like journald that you need to have running even if your primary logging facility is syslogd etc. At this point in time, systemd as init is just a minor part of the issue in my opinion.