3 ms·
>..."Linux is not UNIX." I use systemd and it works fine but it's a great example of a complete departure from the idea of small single-task tools. And how doe
by Grishnakh 10y ago
>..."Linux is not UNIX." I use systemd and it works fine but it's a great example of a complete departure from the idea of small single-task tools.
And how does this approach compare to other UNIXes? And I don't mean UNIXes from the 1970s, I mean ones which are currently in use: FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris, MacOSX. Last I heard, they all had roughly equivalent init systems to systemd.
- digi_owl 10y agoSolaris and MacOS perhaps, if we are talking strict init. but both of the BSDs use BSD init. There is a push by Jordan Hubbard to get FreeBSD to adopt Launchd (the MacOS init) but so far he has been rebuffed and has instead set out to fork FreeBSD into NextBSD. Frankly this is what should have happened with the likes of Debian regarding systemd as well. A parallel release offering systemd as the default, alongside sysv. Then it would be up to the admins to pick, rather than have to apply contortions during or right after install to switch from systemd to sysv. Instead Debian adopted systemd, and we got Devuan as a sysv fork...
- technofiend 10y agoWell I can't speak to other systemd competitors but BSD and System V's scripts never had the concept of bundling in firewall configuration, cgroup config, mount points, etc into PID 1.