[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: sysvinit->systemd transition details



On Saturday, August 23, 2014 3:00:02 PM UTC+2, Brian wrote:
> On Fri 22 Aug 2014 at 17:20:03 -0700, Alexandre Ferrieux wrote:
> 
> > I have a Jessie-based system, which up to the last upgrade used
> > sysvinit of course, and where I had added sysv-rc-conf, and was
> > happily juggling with a few runlevels.
> 
> > But after an upgrade (still in Jessie), systemd rules. No problem
> > about this, but what degree of compatibility should I expect ?
> > Specifically, is there some automated mechanism that would:
> 
> >  - extract initdefault from inittab and do a "systemctl set-default
> >  runlevelX.target"
> >  - scan /etc/rcX.d and do the appropriate "systemctl enable" for all S
> >  scripts
> 
> Systemd doesn't use /etc/inittab. 

Sure, but if the systemd packaged by Debian goes through the hassle of defining runlevelX.target, it might have made sense to carry the initdefault along.


> > If the answer is "no", why is sysv-rc-conf still tolerated under
> > systemd ?
> 
> For backwards compatibilty?

Well, it's a strange form of backwards compatibility. The net result is that the upgrade instantly broke my system. I am not talking about switching from wheezy to jessie, I was already in jessie.

> The sysvinit concept of runlevels is 
> obsolete under systemd. 

I am well aware of the big improvement that systemd is over sysvinit. When I design new things, I am happy to use targets and dependencies instead of runlevels and fixed total orderings. But that's not the point: it is about the claimed backwards compatibility. Agreed, systemd allows to continue using sysvinit scripts, service per service. It just doesn't preserve the integrity at the system level. So I was expecting an transition-helping package... 

-Alex


Reply to: