On 23/05/13 at 12:28 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 05/22/2013 04:53 AM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > - Neither systemd nor upstart are likely to be ported to kfreebsd soon, > > as they both rely on many Linux-specific features and interfaces. > > Though it should be easy enough to port OpenRC to kFreeBSD and Hurd, > once it completes its support for the current init.d scripts. You > completely forgot that option. > > The only thing that worries me is the cgroup thing, but probably it > should be possible to fallback to .pid files in such case (in an > automated way).
I have the (possibly wrong) impression that OpenRC is less advanced technically than systemd and upstart, and lacks many of their advantages For example, according to https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=391945 which is linked from http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Talk:Comparison_of_init_systems, parallel boot does not work due to problems in dependency handling. I also understand that OpenRC does not replace sysvinit, but instead is an additional layer on top of it (for example, sysvinit stays PID 1). Also, you wrote: On 14/05/13 at 17:54 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: > I do think that restarting crashed daemons is a nice feature, > yes. Though I believe OpenRC has this feature too (I have no > time to check for that fact right now, but I think I remember > reading it somewhere). According to http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Comparison_of_init_systems, OpenRC does not have this feature ("No" in "Keeping daemons alive"). I'm not saying that OpenRC should be excluded right now. I'm open to be proven wrong. :) And actually, I'd recommend that once you are reasonably sure that OpenRC is a viable alternative, you follow the same path as for other init systems (policy support, explore how it can co-exist in the archive, explore how we could transition to it, etc.) Lucas
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature