| 1 |
On 01/06/12 05:26, Olivier Crête wrote: |
| 2 |
[snip] |
| 3 |
> The only thing I see them sacrificing is loose coupling, they provide |
| 4 |
> more functionality than any other init system, more correctness |
| 5 |
> (seriously, did you ever read most init scripts out there?), more well |
| 6 |
> defined behavior (all systemd systems boot exactly the same), more |
| 7 |
> stability (I'll claim that Lennart's C is better than any of the |
| 8 |
> boot-time shell scripts I've seen) and well understandability depends |
| 9 |
> who much you can understand C. Probably a bit less understandable for |
| 10 |
> sysadmins, but since they can just play with config files, it's |
| 11 |
> probably easier to understand in the end (and much less prone to |
| 12 |
> breaking than mucking around shell scripts). |
| 13 |
As you apparently have no idea what a sysadmin does I'd appreciate it if |
| 14 |
people like you didn't try to guess what would make things better and |
| 15 |
instead listened to people that have more than their desktop to run. |
| 16 |
(Hint: It's not pressing reset buttons) |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Given the choice between a single line of shell ( cat "$urandom_seed" > |
| 19 |
/dev/urandom ) or 145 lines of undocumented C (which, if naively |
| 20 |
modified by me, might just make systemd segfault) ... there is no choice. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
I do agree with you on one point - most init scripts are really bad |
| 23 |
code, but that doesn't mean shell is bad, it means that you need to |
| 24 |
educate people and file bugs. I've laughed at SLES' /etc/bashrc, I read |
| 25 |
most of upstart and wondered how ... why ... is it can be drunk tiem? |
| 26 |
Still that doesn't mean that rewriting it in bad C is in any way more |
| 27 |
agreeable, and you just made debugging exquisitely painful. Yey. |
Archives