Errr... yeah... whatever...

So has anyone looked into porting RUnit, OpenRC, or S6 in to Slackware for testing yet?

Oh, and I found this:

http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Talk:Com...f_init_systems

I have played with OpenRC and was able to boot Slackware with it, but there were some quirks and I hadn't the time to look into it yet. Maybe you can try it, also.

I've been eyeballing runit for about a day now. The documentation on it is very solid, almost easy to understand. I might give it a try first.

True.
That did sound more hostile than intended (apologies for that).

What I meant:
Look at it's code and you'll see why that's wrong (most is optional).

Yes.
When compiled, systemd is divided in many binaries (not to be confused with distro packages).
Most of them are optional (ps: no offence, but this was mentioned at least twenty times in this anti-systemd thread before) .

As a Slackware user I appreciate your efforts. Although I am dubious about systemd at the present time your success with it is encouraging. The lack of interest may be partly due to timing. A lot of us Slackware users are still nervous about all the recent changes because of KDE 4 and now facing the prospect of new boot loaders to support UEFI. At least in the case of Slackware, KDE will have a lot of impact on whether systemd is considered. If KDE requires systemd, then it is more likely to become a part of Slackware. If KDE doesn't work well with systemd then it is less likely to become a part of Slackware. I'm not saying that I necessarily like the KDE-centric nature of Slackware but that is the current situation.

If you remain enthusiastic about systemd then you may find a future opportunity to repeat your experiment. There is nothing to keep you from using systemd on your own with Slackware. Since Slackware does not push updates onto systems one can use a stable release and then expect it to keep working until the next stable release. Those stable releases are usually 6 months or more apart.

In the past I never bothered to take anything from Slackware "current" because the stable releases were perfectly usable for me. Lately I have updated KDE and the few packages required to use the current KDE.

I understand your frustration wanting to see something you value added to Slackware. I would like to see some things like multilib packages and dmraid added to Slackware. I don't always agree with those maintaining Slackware, but I feel that if they are doing the work, they should make the decisions. I do agree with the conservative approach of Slackware, and would rather wait for stable software than use the very newest software. One thing that I have learned is there will always be new software and there will always be new bugs.

True.
There's no reason to rush things.
If others are willing to help with a SlackBuild (I'm not really familiar with building them), I don't mind spending some extra time on that as well.

If you've ever followed the "Requested Software to be Added to Slackware" topic you'll get a good idea of how minimal Slackware tries to be while keeping a fully working out-of-the-box system maintained. It's not easy because Slackware has grown so much.

If I understand what Reaper was saying here, the dependencies he was asking about go opposite way. Your quotes don't address that.

What for?

3 members found this post helpful.

I see that you missed my point.

Yea I think he did.

Alternative to systemd if at all possible, or expansion of the SysVInit we use at the moment.

Why do we need a 'bigger' init?

For which services is the current init not adequate?

4 members found this post helpful.

I'm not saying our current Init is bad. In fact it's fine as it is, easy to use, understand, etc., but having some Optional stuff might be interesting to try out to increase SysVInit's functionality using RUnit or OpenRC.

I'm not advocating an outright replacement, and far from it. I'd rather create something, if I could, that was optional in every way and only enhanced what was already there.