systemd (Was Re: tmpfs for strategic directories)
sixy at gmx.com
Wed May 26 14:42:24 UTC 2010
On 26/05/10 15:20, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 08:54 -0400, Seth Vidal wrote:
>> On Wed, 26 May 2010, Simo Sorce wrote:
>>> While you don't edit them *all* the time, it is something that is done
>>> regularly, and it is something most admins can do with ease.
>>> Turn them in a C program and you left admins out in the cold, most of
>>> I would be very, very wary of accepting a C "init script".
>>> An unmanageable system is a useless system.
>> +20 million.
>> I couldn't agree more. They need to be scripts, considering how seldom
>> they actually run it makes even less sense to chase down optimization in
>> them by making them compiled.
> This is a nice example of how discussions on this list go off into the
> weeds in no time.
> 'compiling initscripts' ? come on, that is just silly. Nobody is
> proposing such a thing.
> It is completely clear that there needs to be some flexibility in any
> init system to cater to real-world services.
> But it is also clear that there is a difference between gobs of shell
> script and nice and clean files like the ones you find in /etc/init.
Actually the blog post is proposing exactly that, as I read it. And it
seems not only that lots of other people read it the same way, but some
even agree with it.
So I'm not sure I see how this is going off into the weeds - if
transitioning some/all initscripts to C is a genuine goal of the author
of the project, on which he is not prepared to budge, then that is
likely to have bearing on its adoption into fedora, and rightly so.
More information about the devel