6 comments

[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 21.3 ms ] thread
I'd welcome such a tool, but it makes me nervous that it hasn't had any activity at all in three months. Was this just a single-shot effort, and move on?
I tried making a similar project using Qt that would support a host of different init systems, but I unfortunately found that due to the available APIs and differing architectures of the different init systems, a consistent UI was really difficult. Systemd in particular didn't have a dbus API for logs.
It seems like services.msc for systemd.
I got a great I idea: let's turn this into a language, one that supports parallelism, so we can boot the system while maintaining full flexibility! /s

Now if we base this off the D programming language, the universe will remain at peace.. and who knows, something beautiful may blossom.

Nobody has made bold choices in Linux since it's inception. It's the same dated design, now supporting the latest hardware. Because, you know, backwards compatibility. What about compatibility with the future? Nah.