Hi, << If 16 lines of C pose a mystery, one should look for another hobby. Or get a clue already. >> I was NOT referring to 16 lines of code, but to the source code for established inits like sysvinit, runit and systemd. If *at the first glance*, these projects do not instill some feeling of awe, then either you are a genius of I am a moron. Choose whatever you think reflects reality.
I chose to follow what I was recommended and actually wrote a RUDIMENTARY Perl script. Why are some so irritated about that?! Someone better than me, and I have no problem with people who are more talented than me, could grab the little source and enhance it. After all, this is the purpose of open source licensed under GPL-like licenses. If I am to refer to what I prefer, I say, I prefer a C coded init that does not need a potentially buggy interpreter to run. However, I chose to listen to those who wanted a script and am still thinking about producing an extended version of Felker's init that can respond to shutdown signals. This should avoid having to "agetty tt1 &", log into the new terminal, and issue "/etc/init.d/rc 0" manually. Edward On 17/06/2016, Irrwahn <irrw...@freenet.de> wrote: > On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 07:54:33 +0200, Edward Bartolo wrote: > [...] >> I think it is a mistake to expect a few lines of code written in >> whatever language to outperform other init projects written in several >> thousand lines of code that are well debugged and mature. The place >> for these little scripts, as I see it, is for educational purposes and >> to power small computers like the Raspberry Pi, > > *Definitely* *not*! The smaller the machine, the more efficient > the code should be. And having an interpreter as yet another layer > of complexity (besides the C library) between the kernel and the > PID1 program is contra-productive in this regard. And, BTW, your > Script in it's current form is still missing some essential features > (i.e. setsid, setpgid) to make it actually work as intended. > And no, it is not a good idea to delegate that task to the exec'ed > program (I leave it as an exercise for the reader to find out why). > And yes, I will continue to point out errors and debunk misconceptions > in your posts, for the benefit of the elusive "innocent reader" of > DNG. > > As for the educational value: I fail to see what good does learning > things already proven wrong. > >> and maybe, to power >> the computer of enthusiast adolescent computer geeks who want to >> understand what goes on inside their operating system. Mind you, this >> is not a deep look inside what happens when an operating system boots, > > Correct, in that it represents a superficial and wrong and view, and > it paints a warped picture of the things *actually* happening. > >> but it is better than having nothing, or worse of being presented >> with mystery where logic should prevail. > > If 16 lines of C pose a mystery, one should look for another hobby. > Or get a clue already. > > Regards > Urban > > > _______________________________________________ > Dng mailing list > Dng@lists.dyne.org > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng > _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
