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
Runit is 5474 SLOCs. Most source files are shorter than 100 lines. Works like a charm. Implements an init system; does not replace DNS, syslog, inetd, or anything else.

Systemd, by construction, is a set of Unix-replacing daemons. An ideal embedded system setup is kernel, systemd, and the containers it runs (even without podman). This makes sense, especially given the Red Hat's line of business, but it has little relation to the Unix design, or to learning how to do things from scratch.

>>nine_k+gr
> but it has little relation to the Unix design

It's more like Windows! /duck

>>p_ing+gA
I have been saying for years that Microsoft would eventually deprecate WinNT and switch Windows over to a Linux foundation. Things seem to be slowly but continually moving in that direction.

>>its_ma+tE
Makes no sense to dump a superior kernel and executive for Linux.

The Win32 layer is the issue, not the underbelly.

>>p_ing+7I
They might use the NT kernel and their own version of the Linux userland.

I'd be open to the idea, if the kernel were open sourced (MIT licensed?) so I could play with it too.

>>its_ma+0O1
Why do that when Win32 is what everyone wants?

We’ve already had NT + Linux userland; that was WSLv1.

>>p_ing+8S1
I think if we're talking about "what everyone wants", Windows 11 obviously isn't it, so that's not necessarily the driving force here.

>>its_ma+f02
As I said, everyone wants Win32. What flavor is up to debate, everyone has their own incorrect opinions.

>>p_ing+VM2
It would be much unlike Microsoft if they didn't bring Win32/Win64 compatibility along for the ride somehow, and very stupid also, because as you say that is the real core of Windows in a lot of ways.

I have no idea what they're planning or why, just guessing, as they seem to be bringing Linux and Windows closer together all the time.

>>its_ma+x94
> It would be much unlike Microsoft if they didn't bring Win32/Win64 compatibility along for the ride somehow, and very stupid also, because as you say that is the real core of Windows in a lot of ways.

This requires NT API compatibility due to applications using NT API. Despite Microsoft telling devs don't use the NT API, devs use the NT API and Microsoft makes adjustments to ensure compatibility.

> I have no idea what they're planning or why

Clearly, because the whole idea not only makes no engineering sense, it makes no financial sense. They need to build the NT kernel anyway -- it runs the entirety of Azure services!