Re: La touche finale

Dans sa dernière diatribe sur son compte +Lennart, Lennart bien conscient que systemd est "validé" fini par expliquer réellement l'impact de ce dernier et qu'il va être très difficile de faire sans ce composant, chose qu'il niait au départ.

The other thing is kdbus. The userspace of kdbus pretty much lives inside of systemd. Bus activation work will be using the same mechanisms as socket activation in systemd, and again you cannot isolate this bit out of systemd. Basically the D-Bus daemon has been subsumed by systemd itself (and the kernel), and the logic cannot be reproduced without it. In fact, the logic even spills into the various daemons as they will start shipping systemd .busname and .service unit files rather than the old bus activation files if they want to be bus activatable. Then, one of the most complex bits of the whole thing, which is the remarshalling service that translates old dbus1 messages to kdbus GVariant marshalling and back is a systemd socket service, so no chance to rip this out of systemd.

Pareil pour logind etc...

Canonical over the years has been working hard on building its own stack that is different to what others do to a major degree. Whether it is Upstart, Mir or Unity, there's a line through the whole stack where they make other choices. Every one of them is pretty much a Canonical exclusivity right now. It's up to Debian to decide whether to follow that, or whether the other communities aren't the happier places to be in.

Je ne sais pas vous mais on n'est pas très loin de la rangaine GWBush: "Vous avec nous ou contre nous".

D'où vient la suprématie de RedHat? Pour quiconque l'ayant utilisé en server, c'est une plaie! Fedora est horrible et je ne comprends pas que ça puisse "faciliter" la vie à un développeur.
Sont-ce là les distributions qui vont définir le GNU/Linux de demain?