Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Sun, 02 Mar 2014 13:05:20 -0600
yaro@marupa.net wrote:
> Sure, systemd has its flaws (While I like the journal, there are
> downsides to a binary-based log when your system is screwed up and
> your only resource is a LiveCD. I don't know if there's a way to read
> the journal outside the system that created it.), but ultimately
> between our choices: Stick with SysV, Upstart (Which takes an
> everything and the kitchen sink approach to its dependency startups
> and encourages complexity.), and OpenRC (Which utterly misses the
> reasons why SysV needs replacing.), I'd choose systemd.
My inclination is to edit out even more, but perhaps too much context
gets hit.
I've been playing UN*X since 1984. Init files are what they are. They
get executed once at boot, and seldom seen again. I've seen different
variations, including having everything in rc.local.
I want to do number crunching, I don't want to be bothered by the boot
process. It works. If I have to go make coffee while the boot process
is happening, I'll go make coffee.
In reading about UN*X since 1984, I have never seen mention of problems
with the boot process, niggles yes. But things that cause the entire
system to be classified as unusable, no. This kind of talk (writing)
in my experience, is just in the last maybe 2 months.
Systemd seems to have 2 proponents, people interested in fast booting,
and people interested in servers. The intersection of those two groups
is almost the NULL set. I think the answer to faster booting is
hibernation, and people have been playing with that for many years as
near as I can tell. To the people running servers who want faster
booting, I would suggest that they not turn the things off.
It isn't change is evil, the saying is if it isn't broken, don't fix it.
Up until a month or so ago, I wouldn't know Lennart from a hole in the
ground. He has a history with projects. Someone suggested he may not
have started Pulse, I don't know. As far as I know, there are still
problems with Pulse. I will not install Pulse on any system I set up,
and if someone wants me to take care of their Linux box, Pulse gets
removed. He may not have started Avahi, I don't know. I disable avahi
daemons and executables as a matter of course, for much more than 1
year. My beef with Avahi? For my LAN, I have 0 need. Why is it
required? Chmod 640 and the problem is more or less gone. But I still
have the useless downloads, which cuts into my bandwidth and possibly
monthly allowance. I don't want to download stuff I don't want or
need. I have no idea if "avahi" is finished?
I read the Free Software/FOSS/Libre news a lot. And I have more than a
decade. I didn't see news that init scripts are broken.
With Respect To boot times, I would think moving to a specialised shell
that had no interactive capability (such as Gnu Readline) might be a
place to start. That the "shell" often had to invoke subshells to do
things, to me might be a reason to try Perl to boot a system. Just as
a trial, Perl is big. But once you get it up and running, it doesn't
need to invoke inferior processes for many tasks, and is capable of
starting binaries with calculated arguments.
Do you have a reference on sysvinit maintainer having problems? I
don't anticipate having time for a couple of months, but maybe after.
Gord
Reply to: