systemd (Was Re: tmpfs for strategic directories)
paul at dishone.st
Fri Jun 11 09:38:48 UTC 2010
On Tue, 25 May 2010, Simo Sorce wrote:
> I'd like to remember that there are *many* upstreams are going to
> resistant to this change. A lot of upstream projects need to be
> compatible to a lot of Linux and Unix systems, even old ones, so
> before they move they want guarantee that this is really going to
> be the next thing. That means that until most distributions start
> using systemd they are not going to do the work.
> So before it is rushed in it is paramount that tests are done with
> those application s that will not have systemd support and make sure
> there is not going to be regressions there.
Even bigger question: The architecture has to be correct.
Systemd is trying to solve dependencies between applications by
considering simple FD activity (by acting as a proxy for
applications). However, there almost certainly are more complex,
logical dependencies which are not visible to systemd, and hence
which apps will still have to deal with and resolve between
In short, we will still need that app-layer. We need to consider how
that impacts architecturally on the worth of solving a subset of
problems in a lower layer.
Paul Jakma paul at jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
I'm not a real movie star -- I've still got the same wife I started out
with twenty-eight years ago.
-- Will Rogers
More information about the devel