From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1S9FzM-0004he-PK for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 13:17:37 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6BE1FE0AAC; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 13:17:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f181.google.com (mail-wi0-f181.google.com [209.85.212.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4630E093B for ; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 13:15:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wibhr17 with SMTP id hr17so2447533wib.10 for ; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 06:15:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:organization :x-mailer:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GE75xr9D8uGCNvT7c4bfChqA+AWg9UTokIF9gVD3/bY=; b=oAHFGmuGHIsHN30ir2Hip9Oiu8Y3i28jFwhrXidLZZNEtrkJWd0DboQJNNGjOcIF10 TtgE0BNN1hU2aPFXI8LiglE0Pg8rR+h0UD55YzvghtRpXl7WKmiQXyNPWboFfwvBaoqe NxEyi5+QWCgyZ+hQ3pSHMYLvmbbfh8OjdyPDSdVPZSGR3d7Ppgjn6C0AEM+pAvd55qNe hPX5xFdu58/HS1Dt6OrZvonASFjQTzXtZgT/X7Adt0uSG3e9XQK+CNs5/bdB76nhDjT7 WxUdDjjW23AV3z11YY/mMHrwFFzkf/yyMLdrZv+j3SxP4OsUbShFZRx0ypycMlYrrTLr YWcg== Received: by 10.180.85.35 with SMTP id e3mr12418814wiz.6.1332076556955; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 06:15:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from khamul.example.com (196-215-69-205.dynamic.isadsl.co.za. [196.215.69.205]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id gg2sm26862497wib.7.2012.03.18.06.15.54 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 18 Mar 2012 06:15:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2012 15:15:02 +0200 From: Alan McKinnon To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: systemd? [ Was: The End Is Near ... ] Message-ID: <20120318151502.36891b0a@khamul.example.com> In-Reply-To: References: <709768995.843751.1331957483491.JavaMail.open-xchange@email.1and1.com> <20120317115300.GB3615@acm.acm> Organization: Internet Solutions X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.10 (GTK+ 2.24.10; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: d5400d6b-efe6-4aa3-b6c9-7ad2ac79aa65 X-Archives-Hash: defde61dc61481301be214628d906802 On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 19:45:06 -0600 Canek Pel=E1ez Vald=E9s wrote: > * Finally, and what I think is the most fundamental difference between > systemd and almost any other init system: The service unit files in > systemd are *declarative*; you tell the daemon *what* to do, not *how* > to do it. If the service files are shell scripts (like in > OpenRC/SysV), everything can spiral out of control really easily. And > it usually does (again, look at sshd; and that one is actully nicely > written, there are all kind of monsters out there abusing the power > that shell gives you). I'm having a wet dream right about now :-) init has been my pet peeve for years, starting with sysvinit. Why do I need 9 runlevels all fully configured, when me, my machines, the company's server, every Linux user in the company and every other use I have ever personally met, only use 1 of them? Let's not even discuss the amount of complexity that gets pushed into the init scripts themselves. Here's what I want: When the machine starts, I want services X, Y and Z to run. The software figures out what order they must start in and how the deps work. Clean, neat, easy. Maintenance mode is handled easily with two stages in startup: early_start and late_start. Maintenance mode is what you have between them. Again - nice, clean and simple. --=20 Alan McKinnnon alan.mckinnon@gmail.com