Re: default init on non-Linux platforms
On 02/28/2014 01:10 AM, Tom H wrote:
>> Just to name a few:
>> - getting rid of the ugly LSB headers
>
> Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The "Short-Description" and
> "Description" LSB fields are useless, but I don't find Debian's LSB
> headers and Gentoo's squiggle-delimited stanzas any more beautiful or
> uglier than the other. What's important is that they do the job of
> allowing their respective rc routines order the startup - and they both
> do so.
IMO, it's better because less verbose. I just feel like the syntax is
better, also because it's integrated with the rest of the runscript
syntax, but that might be consider not so important, I can agree with
that to some degree.
>> - Dependency loop breaking system
>
> What does this mean? That there are bugs in the dependency headers in
> the 1000-odd initscripts in Debian where openrc can work through the
> problem and insserv send you to the BTS?
This means that OpenRC goes through the "use" links (Should-Start, in
the LSB header format), and see if it needs to remove one of them in
order to break the dependency loop, and have a somehow satisfying boot
order. Note that this is only a feature available in a Debian specific
patch for the moment (not upstreamed yet). In Debian, that's located in
debian/patches/0020-dependency-loop-resolver.patch if you want to have a
look. I hope we can have this upstreamed soon before 0.13 is released.
> Is the mini-runscript style as experimental as Petter's 2-line sysv-rc
> script?
It's not. It's just that with OpenRC, you can decide to implement *or
not* the start() and stop() function. If you don't, then OpenRC will use
its internal function instead.
> Anyway, ifupdown and netifrc are pretty much equivalent.
And I don't see the point of having Debian switching to the Gentoo style
of things, so we agree! :)
> Finally, there's the issue of parallel boot. Debian has it in squeeze
> and wheezy with insserv. Has openrc fixed "rc_parallel"?
Yes. The dependency loop breaking system fixed it. What's remaining to
be fixed though, is the text output which is (very) ugly when the
parallel booting is activated.
Thomas Goirand (zigo)
Reply to: