zlacker

>>cf100c+(OP)
This is a mindblower. To quote Bruce Dubbs:

''As a personal note, I do not like this decision. To me LFS is about learning how a system works. Understanding the boot process is a big part of that. systemd is about 1678 "C" files plus many data files. System V is "22" C files plus about 50 short bash scripts and data files. Yes, systemd provides a lot of capabilities, but we will be losing some things I consider important.

However, the decision needs to be made.''

>>cf100c+n
With limited resources, sometimes practicality needs to win. Kudos to Bruce for putting aside his (valid) feelings on the subject and doing what is best for the team and community overall.

>>clintf+86
How is this best? It defeats the whole point. I’m going to stop recommending LFS to people wanting to learn about this stuff.

>>adastr+0y
"best" meaning the best decision the LFS team can make given their limited, unpaid time and resources. They feel maintaining guides for two parallel init systems is unsustainable even though they would prefer not to have systemd as the only option.

>>csb6+gT
The actual best decision would be to stick with his principles and make LFS be sysvinit-only instead, with zero fucks given about Gnome/KDE if they refuse to play ball.

I for one will not be strong armed into systemd or any other tech. If KDE makes it impossible for me to run without systemd, it goes into the trash bin. I will just install Trinity (KDE3) and be done with it. (Gnome deserves no consideration whatsoever.)