Re:Debian reconsiders init-system diversity
by pvg on Tuesday November 12, 2019 @01:23AM
(#21511958)
A lot of the systemd criticism (whether right or wrong) makes the claim the design is wrong. You can't really address that by asking critics for a precisely equivalent/capable implementations of something they feel is fundamentally misdesigned.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Debian reconsiders init-system diversity
by mateuszf on Tuesday November 12, 2019 @01:29AM
(#21511977)
No, he's asking for something with the same features and consistency, it can be designed however you like.
Re:Debian reconsiders init-system diversity
by beatgammit on Wednesday November 13, 2019 @12:46AM
(#21521440)
The issue is that many believe that the feature set is the problem. Why do you need consistency across services that have little in common?
The basic idea of an init system is pretty simple: start services in such a way that the system comes up reliably. There are two main approaches here, simple but inefficient or complex and more efficient. The FreeBSD/rsysv approach is the former, while the systemd/launchd approach is the latter. If I just want to make sure services start on boot in the right order, why not just have a script run it all? For 99% of use cases, it's good enough, so why complicate matters?
I do appreciate systemd and the faster boots I get from it, but I still find myself longing for similar init systems.