Brian Masinick
@xaver The reason we’re doing this is that we already have multiple init alternatives and instead of building an ever increasing number of ISO images, at least by integrating the init alternatives into a single ISO image we can use and evaluate them.
@ProwlerGr has stated his personal reasons why runit is one of the least preferable options, at least in terms of the run level interaction with the various services. The dinit alternative to runit seems solid, but it’s one of the newer options. S6 has been building up for years as the logical successor to sysVinit, and 66 is an alternative service manager for s6.
There’s a possibility that a future version of antiX might not offer all of these, and it might include one of the “newer” init alternatives that we’re testing now, but several people have asked about sysVinit, so it’s still included. Anyway, that’s a short explanation of why there are so many options; it might not tell the whole story, but part of this is that we’re trying out some of these in volume – and of course they are ALL alternatives to the systemD that the majority of other Linux distributions use; we will not be joining that crowd as long as the current team and organization is in place!
--
Brian Masinick
Alternate "Search B":
This search page