Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Wesley Leggette <wleggette@××××.net>
To: Wouter van Kleunen <kleunen@××××××××××.nl>
Cc: George Shapovalov <george@g.o>, gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Init replacement
Date: Sun, 04 May 2003 16:12:34
Message-Id: 1052064144.1708.3.camel@cyr.kaylix.net
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Init replacement by Wouter van Kleunen
1 On Sat, 2003-05-03 at 04:14, Wouter van Kleunen wrote:
2 > On Fri, 2 May 2003, George Shapovalov wrote:
3 >
4 > > I totaly agree with the choice argument.
5 > > Then, personally I have a mixed feeling about this system. On one hand I have
6 > > all the same arguments about introducing unnecessary dependencies, tightness
7 > > and non-compliance (not that our present way is completely "compliant", but
8 > > this one is much further away.).
9 > > On the other hand this is quite a nice approach to automation of init scripts
10 > > handling and looks to be a clean way to parallelize the process. The former
11 > > should allow creation of nicely looking front ends for init sequence
12 > > manipulation, which even a newbie user should be able to apply for simplistic
13 > > manipulation, but that should also allow a more involved edits for the
14 > > inclined user.
15 > >
16 > > This makes me think, that both approaches have a room to existance as they are
17 > > targeting diferent situations (namely small goal-specific systems, where
18 > > tightness and hands-on controll are a must vs desktop and ease-of-abuse).
19 > > Thus the only sensible way of going about adding this to gentoo I see is to
20 > > create a new (experimental) profile.
21 > >
22 > > Wouter: this apparently requires:
23 > > 1. impementation to stabilize
24 > Yup. I believe it is usable now, but only for people who know what they
25 > are doing.
26 >
27 > > 2. finding large enough group of interested people, who would provide support
28 > > and maintaince to the profile (and this is apparently pointless without some
29 > > backing on a user side)
30 > I cannot write all the services myself, so indeed i need people to back me
31 > up on this. The same goes for sysvinit, the author of sysvinit did not
32 > write all the init scripts in the world.
33
34 I'll definitly help out writing scripts. Your system is so much easier
35 to read than sysvinit. And it's a lot easier to write for. It's more
36 english like. And, hey, if you can't write for XML, I don't know WHAT
37 you've been doing all these years. Everybody should know HTML, and XML's
38 syntax is the exact same. There's only about five new words to learn to
39 get your XML down pat. I don't understand why people are being such a
40 stick in the mud about all this.
41
42 >
43 > > 3. appropriate packaging of all related software, so that it could be
44 > > effectively handled by the profile..
45 > >
46 > > As you see not too small amount of work ;), but who knows, may be some time
47 > > this will become more popular than our present way?
48 > >
49 > > George
50 > >
51 > >
52 > > On Friday 02 May 2003 13:34, Joshua Brindle wrote:
53 > > > >On Fri, May 02, 2003 at 10:08:03AM -0700, Jon Kent wrote:
54 > > > >It's not a proposal to change Gentoo's default init-system (or at least I
55 > > > >hope so). I fully support the OP with his work because one can never know
56 > > > >what it provides untill it's available.
57 > > > >
58 > > > >So, keep up the development.
59 > > >
60 > > > I agree. Everyone here should know very well that gentoo is about
61 > > > choices. We provide the user with choices every opportunity we have,
62 > > > though some places it's difficult to do. When a choice presents itself
63 > > > don't scrutinize it, we do not ever attempt to lock users into a single
64 > > > solution, and we make every attempt to provide as many choices as possible.
65 > > >
66 > > > On the subject of init scripts, I recall having a conversation with seemant
67 > > > about this init system which used tree based dependancies and could start
68 > > > init scripts simaltaeneously if their dependancy trees didn't collide (for
69 > > > faster bootups), does this solution provide this? we'd really like to get
70 > > > something that will take some of the overhead out of the init system...
71 > > >
72 > > > Joshua Brindle
73 > >
74 > >
75 > > --
76 > > gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list
77 > >
78 >
79 >
80 > --
81 > gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list
82 --
83 Wesley Leggette <wleggette@××××.net>
84
85
86 --
87 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-dev] Re: Init replacement "Björn Lindström" <bkhl@×××××××××××××.se>
Re: [gentoo-dev] Init replacement "C. Brewer" <cbrewer@×××××××××××××.net>