News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Busybox removes support for systemd by XorNot on Saturday October 31, 2015 @09:55PM (#10485102)
Process supervision goes back a long away...and has pretty much never been included out of the box in any server-oriented Linux distros.

It also looks a lot more like systemd in systems with good process supervision like Solaris.

Re:Busybox removes support for systemd by vezzy-fnord on Saturday October 31, 2015 @10:07PM (#10485133)
Which is a failure of people making server distros, not those writing process supervisors.

Not at all. SMF supports delegated restarters, its milestones can contain far more state information (and explicitly) than targets can, it uses a configuration repository which enables runtime dynamic service state modification at a far higher rate than the relatively static systemd, its dependency system is simpler, it's integrated with the hardware fault manager (also to provide service resource identifiers beyond the COMM name), its profiles are more granular than presets, it has explicit service instance support and logging is flat file-based in /var/svc/log.

SMF has plenty of its own issues, but it's quite different from systemd. I think the delegation aspect is one of its most valuable lessons, but ultimately I also believe it's too overarching for a modern init.