9 ms·
If that complexity isn't exposed, then it isn't more complicated. Lots of init scripts used to be quite different across distributions and very long. Nowaways t
by bkor 11y ago
If that complexity isn't exposed, then it isn't more complicated. Lots of init scripts used to be quite different across distributions and very long. Nowaways the systemd unit files are shipped upstream and you just package them. That's vastly less complex.
- Karunamon 11y agoIt's less complex in the same way that a C program is less complex than equivalent assembly - the complexity is just moved one layer of abstraction down, but it still exists, and can still bite you in certain ways.
- simoncion 11y ago> If that complexity isn't exposed, then it isn't more complicated. It may not appear to be more complex to the user, but when your software has a firm dependency on a complex system, it becomes more complex because it is affected by the failure modes, quirks, and restrictions of the software on which it depends. [0] > Lots of init scripts used to be quite different across distributions and very long. I've talked elsewhere in these threads about how systemd's unit files simply shift the complexity for services that need (for whatever reason) complex pre-start logic out of the unit file and into hand-maintained tools. See [1] for my most recent comment on the topic. Make sure to check the footnotes in that comment, too. :) [0] Entirely valid anecdotal evidence on the relative stability of dbus doesn't invalidate my point. dbus is one of many complex software projects that others depend on. :) [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10357379 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10357379