Init

C

ChristiW

Guest
@Darren Hale - I absolutely agree with you!

@Mitt Green - Thank you for posting your links. I have just spent a couple of hours reading them (and links I have found in the comment sections of those links). The first one --- eh, wasn't impressed. The next two had solid arguments. What I like about your links is they have me learn something or should I say, have me in want of learning something new. I now need to investigate the famed PID 1 and it's actual function on what systemd's use of it entails.

I have been mostly reading "anti-systemd" blogs and websites and it would be absolutely unfair of me to not read the "pro systemd" websites in order to make a fair opinion of systemd. Like Darren, I am looking at it with an open mind. What I actually need to learn is the actually use or the need of an init, and what type of system would be best.

One thing about all the articles say or discuss is the user. I am almost certain that unless you are a programmer or system admin, the use of systemd (or use of any init system) is really not all that important. What "users" want is to turn their computer on and do their business. Just like most Windows users wouldn't know the .NET Framework if it bit them in the patootie, most Linux (GNU/Linux) users (non-programmer/system admins) don't know what an init system is if it came up and bit them on their patootie.

It will be interesting on how it all pans out, and will be following it closely. Most definitely will be keeping my eye on Devuan and Debian. It's such a shame that it had to come to a fork, but you never know, it could be the start of something great!

Oh yeah, that is one heck of a dependency map you posted there. A bit scary, but since I really don't know what it all means... ;)
 


O

optimum

Guest
Xorg needs to be replaced NOW. But that is a separate issue.
There is a big difference behind the rationale for X,org replacement and something like systemd replacing sysvinit.

X,org is chock full of redundant and often broken, code - even X developers recognise this and it's why X developers are working on Wayland. You have to wonder when even X,org recommend VNC as a remote desktop server/client solution...

systemd on the other hand is a reinvention of the wheel which will only add code and bloat - which over the years will also become redundant - so it's not a fair comparison at all.

The reason why software such as sysvinit, grep, ksh, sh, tar - to name but a few have persisted for so long, is because it's difficult to improve upon their robust design and simplicity - they perform a specific function and they perform it well. Many of these can be combined - instead of rewriting duplicated code (in fact how the tried and tested init system types UNIX users have been using for a few decades have worked) and it makes debugging and maintenance simpler.

sysvinit, far from being the same kind of mass of bloated code that X,org has become, is actually stunningly simple and flexible.
 
O

optimum

Guest
Oh I don't know about ignoring him
Maybe I wasn't clear: He doesn't represent anybody or anything except himself and his own bigoted views. He certainly doesn't represent anyone or any organisation opposed to systemd.

)Not allowed to post links, most likely due to overzealous spam countermeasures, or I'd point you to some info which would make this a lot clearer.)
 
C

ChristiW

Guest
@optimum - what I did, before I could post links, was just tell the search words one would use to find it. Like the name without the TLD. ;) I am most interested in your link.

And I would, in no way believe that he was the majority of thinking, be it about systemd or any other subject matter. (besides his evident loathing of women, there he would most definitely be in a leadership role!)
 



Top