I think BSD style init is underrated. Controlling everything in rc.conf is wonderful :)
Lets have that in Debian please? Dean On 2014-10-21 11:28, Christopher Browne wrote: > On 17 October 2014 18:51, Ray Andrews <rayandr...@eastlink.ca> wrote: > >> On 10/17/2014 02:38 PM, Christopher Browne wrote: >> >> On 9 October 2014 19:49, Lennart Sorensen <lsore...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> >> wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 09:25:23AM -0700, Ray Andrews wrote: >>>> Can *anything* justify creating a problem that can't be debugged? >>> I suppose that this invalidates one of the functionality claims that was >>> part >>> of the basis for adoption... >> >>> Specifically... >> >>> https://wiki.debian.org/Debate/initsystem/systemd [1] >> >> Well, they certainly write a glowing review of themselves, do they not? >> That's a very well written and convincing doc, but it does seem that not >> enough attention has been paid to the issues that have been raised here. > > Well, it stands to reason that when they were promoting the notion of being > a replacement for SysVInit, they'd put the best face forward. > > And everybody *did* get opportunity to put a face-of-choice forward. > https://wiki.debian.org/Debate/initsystem [2] > > While I wasn't keen on Upstart getting chosen, I think the page they prepared > describing the merits of moving from SysVInit presents good points well. > >> On my system I get strange messages about 'start jobs' and 'stop jobs' which >> come with one minute, thirty second countdowns. I don't know why it has to >> be 90 seconds, would 60 seconds not do the trick? 30 seconds just totally >> wrong? > > Based on the sales job that quotes startup time as 1 second, for there to be > something that takes more than 1 second seems like a severe matter. > >> Still, the big question is: are these fixable glitches and bugs, or do they >> point >> to those deeper, fundamental problems that we've talked about? >> >> But, to be devil's advocate: One thing about the systemd doc above that >> struck me >> as a sound argument was that starting a service is ... starting a service, >> and that >> whereas that mostly happens at init, it makes sense that whatever code/method >> is used to do it at init may as well be used generally. No? > Unfortunately, the current goings-on seem to risk being free of technical > content, > and fodder for flame warring. > > I guess I find myself displeased with certain technical points > (e.g. - claims of 1s boot time, that seem invalidated), but I'm usually > finding > things working on my systems that have SystemD. So far, I can't establish, > from > my own observations, that "different" == "bad". > > -- > When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the > question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle this?" Links: ------ [1] https://wiki.debian.org/Debate/initsystem/systemd [2] https://wiki.debian.org/Debate/initsystem
