1 |
2016-02-09 13:17 GMT+01:00 Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>: |
2 |
|
3 |
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 3:43 AM, Kent Fredric <kentfredric@×××××.com> |
4 |
> wrote: |
5 |
> > |
6 |
> > A pure udev system is in comparison, much simpler than a systemd system. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> I don't buy that at all. In systemd you have a unified object model |
9 |
> across device nodes, mountpoints, services, and cron jobs. In the |
10 |
> alternate model you have completely different implementations of all |
11 |
> of those, each with their own configurations and behaviors. |
12 |
> |
13 |
> > |
14 |
> > And that's much of the beauty of OpenRC. Its simple, it achieves the |
15 |
> > same goals as Systemd and Upstart, etc, but does so with a lot less |
16 |
> > mechanics under the hood, and doesn't clutter up systems with features |
17 |
> > you don't need prematurely. |
18 |
> |
19 |
> OpenRC doesn't achieve MANY of the goals of systemd. Maybe you don't |
20 |
> personally care about some of them, but you really can't compare the |
21 |
> feature sets at this point. |
22 |
> |
23 |
> > And there are great benefits from simplicity over complexity. |
24 |
> |
25 |
> Absolutely. It is great to create a text file and symlink it in a |
26 |
> directory named after a service to make that service auto-restart, or |
27 |
> have a memory limit, or set an IO priority for that service. It is |
28 |
> great to not have to think about anything to have just about all your |
29 |
> processes organized into a sensible cgroup hierarchy. It is great to |
30 |
> be able to tweak one config file to ensure that users who log out of a |
31 |
> system can't leave any processes behind. |
32 |
> |
33 |
> It is great to be able to tweak something in policykit and change |
34 |
> things like who can shut down the system, or who can restart a |
35 |
> service. |
36 |
> |
37 |
> The simplicity of systemd comes from the fact that it has brought what |
38 |
> used to be a collection of many independent tools under one roof, and |
39 |
> created a converging set of interfaces for all of them. |
40 |
> |
41 |
> > And a lot of Gentoo is surprisingly simple: Like our use of bash |
42 |
> > scripts for recipies to build things, like using rsync to deploy/relay |
43 |
> > not just those recipies, but security notices and news items, which |
44 |
> > are themselves reasonably simple formats. |
45 |
> |
46 |
> Well, one thing about Gentoo that certainly isn't simple is our init.d |
47 |
> scripts. |
48 |
> |
49 |
> Compare this: |
50 |
> http://pastebin.com/sSDtpF4t |
51 |
> |
52 |
> With this: |
53 |
> http://pastebin.com/Lfn8r7qP |
54 |
> |
55 |
> Systemd does the job in 10% of the code (and half of it is a comment), |
56 |
> |
57 |
|
58 |
Actually that's incorrect, it does not implement "configdump" and |
59 |
"fullstatus" is it possible for systemd to implement those? |
60 |
Anyway we are hijaking another discussion to OpenRC versus Systemd or it's |
61 |
only my impression? |
62 |
|
63 |
|
64 |
> and doesn't implement its own service polling and killer script during |
65 |
> shutdown independently for every service (not that every init.d script |
66 |
> even does this - most of them will just leave orphans behind, and |
67 |
> systemd will catch orphans that even the lengthy init.d script for |
68 |
> apache misses). |
69 |
> |
70 |
> > |
71 |
> > The only preference I see here is the preference to not have and |
72 |
> > install things your system has no use for, which I find an odd |
73 |
> > preference to be complaining about, and depending on your system |
74 |
> > requirements, that may also be not so much "preference". |
75 |
> > |
76 |
> |
77 |
> And hence my suggestion that we simply get this stuff out of the |
78 |
> stage3s in the first place. Then everybody can just pick the |
79 |
> implementation that best suits their requirements. |
80 |
> |
81 |
> If you want to talk about default providers, the most straightforward |
82 |
> one to use is systemd. It is what people are going to be used to |
83 |
> coming from other distros, it is what every upstream package expects |
84 |
> to be running anyway, and it is the simpler tool that does everything |
85 |
> that most people want. |
86 |
> |
87 |
> For people who want a more exotic configuration, there are |
88 |
> alternatives, and Gentoo should certainly support using them as long |
89 |
> as people care to maintain them. |
90 |
> |
91 |
> -- |
92 |
> Rich |
93 |
> |
94 |
> |