On 6 January 2012 06:14, Patrick Lauer <patr...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On 01/06/12 05:26, Olivier Crête wrote: > [snip] >> The only thing I see them sacrificing is loose coupling, they provide >> more functionality than any other init system, more correctness >> (seriously, did you ever read most init scripts out there?), more well >> defined behavior (all systemd systems boot exactly the same), more >> stability (I'll claim that Lennart's C is better than any of the >> boot-time shell scripts I've seen) and well understandability depends >> who much you can understand C. Probably a bit less understandable for >> sysadmins, but since they can just play with config files, it's >> probably easier to understand in the end (and much less prone to >> breaking than mucking around shell scripts). > As you apparently have no idea what a sysadmin does I'd appreciate it if > people like you didn't try to guess what would make things better and > instead listened to people that have more than their desktop to run. > (Hint: It's not pressing reset buttons) > > Given the choice between a single line of shell ( cat "$urandom_seed" > > /dev/urandom ) or 145 lines of undocumented C (which, if naively > modified by me, might just make systemd segfault) ... there is no choice.
Seems straightforward and well-documented to me: http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/tree/src/random-seed.c. And the "if I naively modify things, they might explode" argument holds for anything. These are basic things that you almost certainly would not be modifying as a sysadmin anyway. I'd hope that the things that you really do want to muck around with are provided as configuration, and if they're not, you talk to upstream and make a case for this being useful to users. Just like with every other open source project. -- Arun Raghavan http://arunraghavan.net/ (Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
