Re: Bug#727708: Fsck SystemD and its developers and its users. GR to override this please.
Excerpts from Svante Signell's message of 2014-02-10 21:49:56 -0800:
> On Mon, 2014-02-10 at 20:53 -0800, Clint Byrum wrote:
>
> > So, perhaps if we teach Upstart and OpenRC to read systemd unit files,
> > and they all can be expected to behave similarly, this will work out.
> > Otherwise, giving everyone a choice just makes work for little gain.
>
> Why should OpenRC and Upstart adapt to a format that is not standardized
> in _any_ way? The format specification should be written by Debian
> people (including downstream), and be a common denominator for all init
> systems wanting to be compatible. The proposal could be based on the LSB
> headers, and a good extension to that has recently been proposed by the
> sysvinit maintainer: Two line init.d scripts
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/02/msg00106.html
Meh. Pick one.
>
> Additionally a very good proposal for a PID 1 program was in
> http://ewontfix.com/14/ "Broken by design: systemd", copied here for
> convenience:
>
> #define _XOPEN_SOURCE 700
> #include <signal.h>
> #include <unistd.h>
>
> int main()
> {
> sigset_t set;
> int status;
>
> if (getpid() != 1) return 1;
>
> sigfillset(&set);
> sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK, &set, 0);
>
> if (fork()) for (;;) wait(&status);
>
> sigprocmask(SIG_UNBLOCK, &set, 0);
>
> setsid();
> setpgid(0, 0);
> return execve("/etc/rc", (char *[]){ "rc", 0 }, (char *[]){ 0 });
> }
>
Indeed, I have no problem with this approach and I'm not crazy about
systemd's scope. But if the default ends up as systemd, it gets a bonus
as the one to follow in the Linux world so IMO it is an easier choice to
just use their syntax.
Reply to: