Alessandro Selli <alessandrose...@linux.com> wrote: >> Hard to believe I listened to the same talk Corbet >> is describing. What I heard was a propaganda piece, >> finding reasons to sell the systemd approach >> to BSD conference attendees. > > Not really. He points out there were good reasons to want a new init, > that systemd was a try at innovating something that was old, and that > this is a different matter compared to *how* that change was implemented.
Beat me to it. I listened and he did make many good points which you've pointed out much more elegantly than I would have managed. While picking out bits by time, I liked his dig at the state of Debian management at around 16 minutes in when he mentions "that vote" :-) > "systemd makes heavy use of dbus. I'm not a big fan of dbus but i am a > big fan of messages. [...] One of the things that I told the BSD people > was basically we should write our own message transport. My version, if > I were to write one, would be kernel resident rather than user space and > would allow a lot more of security and authentication and access control > elements on the actual bus endpoints". Exactly. Whatever the merits (or otherwise) of dbus as an implementation of a messaging system, the function it's trying to implement is a good idea. Ditto udev. And to be honest, a significant chunk of systemd as well - the ideas are good, the implementation and the way it's been managed, <ahem> "no so good". _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
