On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 10:00:48AM +0200, Oz Tiram wrote: > One argument I hear often about systemd is that it more adapted to current > hardware needs, [e.g. here][1] > > > Computers changed so much that they often doesn’t even look like > > computers. And their operating systems are very busy : GPS, wireless > > networks, USB peripherals that come and go, tons of softwares and > > services running at the same time, going to sleep / waking up in a > > snap… Asking the antiquated SysVinit to manage all this is like asking > > your grandmother to twerk. > > What I don't understand is how an init system manages hot pluggable > devices. > What does replacing a hot plugable disk drive it have to do with how the > system is booted? > Maybe this all done at the none init parts of systemd?
Hi, exactly that: systemd has been merged with udev, which is a component that for years has been built to create a device node tree and promptly do something in hotplug situations, e.g. mount a pendrive when you plug it in the USB port. If we think to systemd in two distinct manners, "the init system" and "the genode framework written in C and incapable of interoperativity", we see that systemd as a init is not a big deal, just an init tool that uses config files and not shell scripts and handles parallelization and dependencies; the real problems of freedom and quality of the product come with systemd as a framework for bootstrapping a linux OS (be it the software itself or all the drones who praise it as the "PHUUUUTUUUUOOOORE"). -- Teodoro Santoni Something is wrong. I don't wanna compile 20 KB of Go code to list files. _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng