4 ms·

I think Linus Torvalds coming out in support of systemd helped a lot (or at least confused the UNIX purists enough to calm them down a little). Linus response f

I think Linus Torvalds coming out in support of systemd helped a lot (or at least confused the UNIX purists enough to calm them down a little). Linus response from [0]: > I have to say, I don't really get the hatred of systemd. I think it improves a lot on the state of init, and no, I don't see myself getting into that whole area. > Yeah, it may have a few odd corners here and there, and I'm sure you'll find things to despise. That happens in every project. I'm not a huge fan of the binary logging, for example. But that's just an example. I much prefer systemd's infrastructure for starting services over traditional init, and I think that's a much bigger design decision. > Yeah, I've had some personality issues with some of the maintainers, but that's about how you handle bug reports and accept blame (or not) for when things go wrong. If people thought that meant that I dislike systemd, I will have to disappoint you guys. [0] http://linux.slashdot.org/story/15/06/30/0058243/interviews-linus-torvalds-answers-your-question http://linux.slashdot.org/story/15/06/30/0058243/interviews-...

simoncion 11y ago
I'm not sure that Torvalds says that he likes systemd. I read the quote as saying: "I don't dislike systemd, and I think that it is better than traditional init.". Almost anything [0] is better than SysV init. shrug [0] Upstart, OpenRC, daemontools...
- JdeBP 11y ago
  Strictly speaking, of those three only upstart is actually a replacement for System 5 init. OpenRC and daemontools run under an init, and by and large replace System 5 rc. There are two toolsets (soon to be three) in the daemontools family that provide a replacement for init: nosh and runit. daemontools itself does not, and has had more than a decade of people adapting it to run under init replacements because the vanilla system only targets late 1990s inits, including under upstart as a matter of fact. * http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/daemontools-family.html http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/da... * http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/inittab-is-history.html http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/in... * http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/system-5-rc-problems.html http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/sy...
  - simoncion 11y ago
    So, strictly speaking, is SysV init more than what is described in init(8)? That is to say, is it more than * the parent of all processes, including orphans * the executer of various entries in /etc/inittab, depending on runlevel * the configurer of local and serial consoles * the handler of CTRL+ALT+DEL ?
    - JdeBP 11y ago
      See http://unix.stackexchange.com/a/197472/5132 http://unix.stackexchange.com/a/197472/5132 as well as https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8907445 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8907445 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8904429 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8904429 .
      - simoncion 11y ago
        From one pedant to another, thanks for the correction, and the informative links! So, I guess that the Debian folks were incorrectly claiming that they were looking for a replacement init. They were looking for a replacement rc system, and were willing to accept a replacement init as part of the package.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- digi_owl 11y ago
  Never mind that the term systemd can be used both for the init binary, and the larger project (systemd, networkd, udev, journald, logind, and the list goes on and on). As best i could tell, Torvalds didn't have an issue with systemd as the init. Nor do i think many would (outside of the whole journald thing), except for the snowballing of sub-daemons and absorbed projects (udev for instance existed for a decade as an independent project before being folded into the systemd code tree). Without all that, it may well be that systemd would just be one init among many (i barely noticed the existence of upstart for instance).

simoncion 11y ago

I'm not sure that Torvalds says that he likes systemd. I read the quote as saying: "I don't dislike systemd, and I think that it is better than traditional init.". Almost anything [0] is better than SysV init. shrug [0] Upstart, OpenRC, daemontools...

JdeBP 11y ago
Strictly speaking, of those three only upstart is actually a replacement for System 5 init. OpenRC and daemontools run under an init, and by and large replace System 5 rc. There are two toolsets (soon to be three) in the daemontools family that provide a replacement for init: nosh and runit. daemontools itself does not, and has had more than a decade of people adapting it to run under init replacements because the vanilla system only targets late 1990s inits, including under upstart as a matter of fact. * http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/daemontools-family.html http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/da... * http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/inittab-is-history.html http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/in... * http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/system-5-rc-problems.html http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/sy...
- simoncion 11y ago
  So, strictly speaking, is SysV init more than what is described in init(8)? That is to say, is it more than * the parent of all processes, including orphans * the executer of various entries in /etc/inittab, depending on runlevel * the configurer of local and serial consoles * the handler of CTRL+ALT+DEL ?
  - JdeBP 11y ago
    See http://unix.stackexchange.com/a/197472/5132 http://unix.stackexchange.com/a/197472/5132 as well as https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8907445 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8907445 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8904429 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8904429 .
    - simoncion 11y ago
      From one pedant to another, thanks for the correction, and the informative links! So, I guess that the Debian folks were incorrectly claiming that they were looking for a replacement init. They were looking for a replacement rc system, and were willing to accept a replacement init as part of the package.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
digi_owl 11y ago
Never mind that the term systemd can be used both for the init binary, and the larger project (systemd, networkd, udev, journald, logind, and the list goes on and on). As best i could tell, Torvalds didn't have an issue with systemd as the init. Nor do i think many would (outside of the whole journald thing), except for the snowballing of sub-daemons and absorbed projects (udev for instance existed for a decade as an independent project before being folded into the systemd code tree). Without all that, it may well be that systemd would just be one init among many (i barely noticed the existence of upstart for instance).