Re: I'm not a huge fan of systemd
On Tue, 8 Jul 2014 17:55:15 -0400
Tom H <email@example.com> wrote:
> If we're going to the effort of
> replacing init systems and changing our startup scripts, a bare
> minimum requirement for me is that we at least address the known
> weaknesses of the sysvinit mechanism, namely:
> * Lack of integration with kernel-level events to properly order
I don't want to be integrated with kernel level events. Give me a thin
interface and let me go. I'm a big believer in encapsulation.
> * No mechanism for process monitoring and restarting beyond inittab.
:-) Maybe start your processes with Daemontools.
I'm serious. If a process is that important that it needs to restart
the instant it terminates, Daemontools can do that. I don't know what
kind of monitoring you envision, but Daemontools has the svc and svok
and svstat commands. And the cool thing about Daemontools is you just
write a script to run the program from a terminal, wrap it in a couple
things, and it's a daemon. Complete with logging. *Text* logging.
> * Heavy reliance on shell scripting rather than declarative syntax.
I'd consider heavy reliance on shell scripting to be a benefit.
Everyone on the planet knows Bash, which by now is a standard. Do we
really have to learn yet another "declarative syntax"?
> * A fork and exit with PID file model for daemon startup.
Definitely a pain in the ass but not a showstopper.
Steve Litt * http://www.troubleshooters.com/
Troubleshooting Training * Human Performance