Funny how you consider all of these other distro's to be alpha; yet in less than 1 hour of using Ubuntu, i experienced a number of problems, that i don't experience at all, on my "alpha-grade" distribution... (and typically, Ubuntu has historically shipped half-baked / alpha-grade software in their distro).
besides all of that, Ubuntu is already pulling in logind (systemd) and my guess is that in the future; the benefits they currently see by using upstart are going to be out-weighed by the benefits of using Systemd (which is a superior init system). But likely, Canonical/Ubuntu wouldn't even consider doing that until Debian users (not Ubuntu users) have used / tested systemd quite a bit ~ since it is largely debian developers who do most of the hardwork that Ubuntu/Canonical benefits from. (what 80%+ pakcages come from debian).
Last edited by ninez; 08-25-2013 at 10:20 AM.
And, in this case, 13.10 is not even "feature-frozen", witch means that the bug-fixing sprint did not even start.
I believe that Ubuntu will switch to Systemd if it comes a time where switching would really out-weighed the benefits of keeping Upstart. That's not currently the case.besides all of that, Ubuntu is already pulling in logind (systemd) and my guess is that in the future; the benefits they currently see by using upstart are going to be out-weighed by the benefits of using Systemd (which is a superior init system).
Canonical is known to be pragmatical (that mostly why they generate so much hate on Phoronix and other niches, they just move forward without caring about what other may think). I don't see any reason for them to keep Upstart forever IF systemd becomes more interesting for them in the future.
Last edited by Malizor; 08-25-2013 at 11:04 AM.
Ubuntu (the only distro that uses upstart) is often pushing things before they are ready, is based on random snapshots from debian unstable, and is certainly not known for its lack of bugs and stability, so your comparison of "systemd is unstable because distros that use it are bleeding edge" doesn't hold much water. As someone that has used ubuntu for years, I consider it "beta quality" software at best. The non-LTS releases have always been glorified betas.
I don't have anything against upstart itself, its a decent init system, but systemd is superior. I can understand canonical not wanting to adopt it though because they already have their own decent init system.
Also many more distros use systemd then the ones on your list, although they are not "major" distros (with the exception of mageia/mandriva maybe). Off the top of my head: Mageia, ROSA Linux, Mandriva, Sabayon, Frugalware, Chakra, and some mobile platforms are also using it, tizen and mer (mer is the base for jolla's sailfish os).
And the upcoming RHEL 7 will be using it, and RHEL would not include it unless it was rock solid and ready. And from posts I've seen from some debian developers lately, debian also looks like it will be adopting systemd in the future (but it almost certainly won't happen in jessie, mabye jessie +1). Here's some talks from a debian dev about systemd: http://meetings-archive.debian.net/p...s_debunked.ogv, http://meetings-archive.debian.net/p...th_systemd.ogv.
And this post: http://people.debian.org/~stapelberg...-portable.html
So in conclusion systemd is pretty well tested and used in various distros today, even if some of the major distros that have adopted it are "bleeding edge". And we have several extremely "stable" distros (RHEL) which will have it in its next major version, and (debian) which is moving (slowly like debian always does ) to adopting it in the future.Not embracing these features and staying with sysvinit indefinitely is not a viable option if Debian wants to remain relevant for today’s demands. In the short term, the migration to systemd will cause additional maintenance effort for individual package maintainers, but it will pay off in the long term.
Last edited by bwat47; 08-25-2013 at 11:01 AM.
Last edited by ninez; 08-25-2013 at 11:10 AM.