Re: /bin/sh (was Re: jessie release goals)
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:05:59AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Having a rock-stable PID 1 is nice and all, but it doesn???t help you if
> something important crashes. On a production server, if apache crashes
> and fails to reload properly because the scripts don???t get the ordering
> right, it doesn???t help you that init is still running fine. It would
> help you to have an init implementation that can detect which components
> can be initialized and at what time.
The cases you describe still are pretty rare. Having used both
implementations as PID 1, I was not able to make this noticeable. On the
contrary I had more issued with running gpsd on systemd reliably. My
conclusion from this? My data is a random outlier.
For many users these benefits are so rare that they most likely don't
care.
> I was all for kfreebsd when it was proposed, but now that it exists and
> nobody uses it, I am appalled at the idea of using it as an excuse to
> stop making improvements to the linux ports. Should we stop any
> migration to a decent networking system because BSD doesn???t support
> netlink sockets, too?
I was not meaning to imply that. On the contrary turning systemd into
the default will/would require porting it to kfreebsd, dropping support
for kfreebsd, or using different init systems for linux and kfreebsd.
The latter implies a limited choice on init systems. This choice
actually might make sense as the cost might be lower than porting
systemd.
So my bottom line here would be: Providing freedom of choice is neither
something that is always good nor something that is always bad. It just
happens to be useful sometimes.
Helmut
Reply to: