4 ms·
Isn't systemd a daemon manager that solves all the pain of managing daemons though? If you want D-Bus activation and good daemon control then just use systemd
by tdicola 11y ago
Isn't systemd a daemon manager that solves all the pain of managing daemons though? If you want D-Bus activation and good daemon control then just use systemd as it was designed.
- vezzy-fnord 11y agoYou don't realize the problem with an essential component like D-Bus properly integrating only one service manager out of dozens instead of being generic, or even better - not having explicitly broken functionality to begin with? (And no, systemd does not solve all the pain. Having to debug dependency loops, stuck job states, journal fragmentation, intertwining of system and service states, etc. isn't much fun for the benefits that I can just as easily get from something intensely more modular and sanely architected like nosh or s6.)
- viraptor 11y agosystemd is a daemon manager that works on a limited number of linux (and only linux) systems. Sometimes you can't use systemd, sometimes you just don't want to. Most opensource software tries to be compatible with as much ecosystem as possible so that's not a problem. That doesn't seem to be the case for dbus/systemd. Other systems which solve the same pain: upstart, nosh, daemontools, supervisord, ...
- throafmgm 11y agoThe post's author writes a systemd-alike daemon manager named 'nosh'. Hence the complaints about the non-systemd behavior. Also note that DBus runs on more than just Linux (BDSs and perhaps OS X or Windows), while systemD only runs on Linux.