Re: upstart: please update to latest upstream version

[Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-v-b@web.de>]

Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@iki.fi> writes:

> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 01:12:08PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> The meme that systemd is better than upstart because it doesn't depend on
>> a shell is poppycock.  No one has done any benchmarking to support the claim
>> that /bin/sh is a bottleneck for upstart (particularly not on Debian or
>> Ubuntu, where /bin/sh is dash, not bash);
>
> I have. Not on debian, but on debianish system with dash. And the result was
> that shellscripts are indeed the bottleneck. We still did convert to upstart
> since we believed it would allow us to cut down the amount of shell scripts.
> The event based architecture however forced much more shell scripting[1]
> that made the boot time improvement much less than hoped.
>
> Riku
>
> [1] stuff like this:
>
> -snip-
> post-start script
>     # wait until daemon is ready
>     timeout=6
>     while [ ! -e /var/run/cups/cups.sock ]; do 
>         sleep 0.5
>         timeout=$((timeout-1))
> -snip-

Upstart also does not support Should-Start which makes it impossible to
provide corect init scripts for a number of services. For example autofs
will not work if it uses nis because nis is not started before
autofs. Due to the lack of Should-Start the only way to get nis to start
before autofs would require autofs to depends on nis.

This design flaw makes upstart unsuitable for Debian imho, where choice
and flexibility is a large part.

MfG
        Goswin