Debian's general vote on initialization systems already has a winning choice

Debian init system

At the beginning of month cWe share with you here on the blog the news of the general vote that was generated in order to decide on whether the system will support multiple initialization systems. as a result of the fact that, in 2014, the Technical Committee approved the transfer of the default layout to systemd, but did not develop the solution regarding to the support of various initialization systems.

The committee leader recommended that package makers maintain sysvinit support as an alternative initialization system, but indicated that he could not impose his point of view and that in each case the decision should be made independently.

After that, some developers tried to hold a general vote, but a preliminary vote showed that there was no need to decide on the use of various initialization systems.

A few months ago, after problems with the inclusion of the elogind package (necessary for Gnome to work without systemd) in the test branch due to a conflict with libsystemd, the Debian project leader raised the question again, as the developers did not They could agree and their communication became a confrontation and ended up giving a solution in this regard with the general vote.

Now the results of said vote were released on the date that was stipulated (December 28) where they were involved in the maintenance of packages and the maintenance of the infrastructure on the subject of supporting multiple initialization systems.

Debian init system
Related article:
Voting begins on Debian initialization systems

Y the winning option was the second element ("B") in the list, which describes that

“Systemd is still preferred, but the possibility of supporting alternative initialization systems remains. Technologies, such as elogind, that allow you to run system-bound applications in alternate environments are considered important. Packages can include init files for alternate systems. »

Voting was carried out using the Condorcet method, in which each voter ranks all the options in the order of their preference and when calculating the result, how many voters prefer one option to another.

Winning choice recognizes that systemd service units are the preferred form to configure daemons and services to run, but it assumes that there are environments where developers and users can create and apply alternative initialization systems and functional alternatives to systemd features.

Developers alternative solutions should provide resources for your work and package formatting. Workarounds, such as elogind, used to organize the launch of applications tied to specific system interfaces, are still important to the project.

Supporting such initiatives requires assistance in areas where alternative technologies being developed intersect with the rest of the project, for example delaying patch reviews and discussions is unacceptable.

It is allowed to include systemd unit files and startup scripts in packages to start services. Packages can use any of the systemd features at the request of the package maintainer, as long as these features meet the requirements of the Debian rules and are not tied to experimental or non-Debian-supported features of other packages.

In addition to systemd, packages may also include support for alternative initialization systems and provide components to override systemd specific interfaces. Accompanying staff make decisions to enable patches as part of regular procedures

Debian commits to working with derived distributions They have chosen other initialization systems for themselves, but the interaction is based on the level of the maintainers, on which decisions are made about it.

Finally, this result was not to the liking of many, because in networks they showed their discontent as many comment that this does not differ from what it is at present, since they basically transfer all the responsibility to the maintainers.

If you want to know more about it, you can check the publication of the results In the following link. 


A comment, leave yours

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

*

*

  1. Responsible for the data: AB Internet Networks 2008 SL
  2. Purpose of the data: Control SPAM, comment management.
  3. Legitimation: Your consent
  4. Communication of the data: The data will not be communicated to third parties except by legal obligation.
  5. Data storage: Database hosted by Occentus Networks (EU)
  6. Rights: At any time you can limit, recover and delete your information.

  1.   01101001b said

    "Finally, this result was not to the liking of many [...] as many comment that this does not differ from what it is today [...]"

    I did not expect anything else from Debian. In the last decade there has been nothing more than a lot of noise and few "lights" (it was not for nothing that the people of Devuan opened up to them).

    Again, the problem was never that systemd was a replacement for init. The problem was always that systemd was made to stick its nose into absolutely everything, with consequent superfluous, almost spurious code, an absurdly useless level of complication, bugs, and bulk attack vectors. And here we are, with a "Linux" less and less "Linux" and more and more a "Wind * ws" of 2nd.

    Now using a distro without systemd is almost a joke because only systemd is replaced by some other loading method ... but systemd is still spread throughout the system like a cancer (although it is said that it is maintained only for a matter of satisfying dependencies and not is running).

    In short, it seems that Linux will not escape the maxim of the Matrix: "Everything that has a beginning ... has an end".