| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA256 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 06/01/12 03:16 AM, Alec Warner wrote: |
| 5 |
> Perhaps keep 'init' as a fairly simple codebase and run 'systemd' |
| 6 |
> as pid 2 and they can chat with each other (over dbus?) |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
I seriously hope that was a troll... the whole point of systemd, as I |
| 10 |
understand it, is to entirely replace |
| 11 |
sysvinit+whatever-rc-script-system you have. To instead make systemd |
| 12 |
only an openrc alternative, and then trash sysvinit by making it |
| 13 |
communicate over dbus, would be a more horrible kludge. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Addressing your point, though, I think it might be desirable to |
| 16 |
perhaps strip out all of the actual direct service-control stuffs from |
| 17 |
systemd and make it more of a sysvinit replacement -- that is, have it |
| 18 |
simply launch/control services via init.d/ shell scripts (or whatever, |
| 19 |
as long as they're external) instead of relying on internal service |
| 20 |
code within the systemd binary itself. And I expect that this |
| 21 |
wouldn't really be that hard to do, given that systemd already has to |
| 22 |
support external service scripts right? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
That said, I don't think I ever intend to migrate to systemd for my |
| 25 |
server systems -- sysvinit + baselayout-1-rc is still working just |
| 26 |
fine for me; I haven't even migrated most of them to openrc yet. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 29 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
iF4EAREIAAYFAk8HExcACgkQAJxUfCtlWe07kQEA08+XUqQbAybxlmfiPI6QCcUN |
| 32 |
f9kQX3arCKshaIou4M0A/j0IXAi/uZlg3a7pZ9+HXo2fwcpz84J7PKQSwKr20mrq |
| 33 |
=sC3I |
| 34 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives