Re: [gentoo-user] Re: systemd? [ Was: The End Is Near ... ]

[Dale]

Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 19:45:06 -0600
> Canek Peláez Valdés <caneko@×××××.com> 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.
>


Well, I am not normal.  I, on a regular basis, use single, boot and
default runlevels.  So there !!  lol

Dale

:-)  :-)

-- 
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or
how you interpreted my words!

Miss the compile output?  Hint:
EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--quiet-build=n"