systemd (Was Re: tmpfs for strategic directories)

Lennart Poettering mzerqung at
Tue Jun 1 00:11:41 UTC 2010

On Wed, 26.05.10 12:49, Matthew Miller (mattdm at wrote:

> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 06:39:43PM +0200, drago01 wrote:
> > Again the sysadmin case just implies that something *else* is broken.
> Sure. As a distribution, we don't have control over upstream projects and
> their assumptions for daemon startup, shutdown, status, etc. Sometimes, they
> want odd things.
> > Well if changing over to C does only get rid of this "disease" it
> > would be enough of a gain.
> > It would force broken apps to be fixed, and let admins edit
> > *configuration* files and not source code.
> If you think you can get every open source / free software project to agree
> on completely consistent behavior, or if you can create a text-format config
> file for your compiled daemon handler which handles every unanticipated
> case, well, okay. But it seems unlikely. (And that's not even considering
> running non-free software, which, while something I try to avoid, is a
> reasonable real-world use.)

Well, if we cannot get rid of all shell scripts that is fine. If we can
get rid of 90% of them a lot is achieved already. And to me it looks
much more like > 98% of the scripts that can be removed without
ill-effect if systemd is used.


Lennart Poettering                        Red Hat, Inc.
lennart [at] poettering [dot] net           GnuPG 0x1A015CC4

More information about the devel mailing list