3 ms·
According to that page "the main reason Alpine aims to replace" OpenRC is they want the init system to "interface with external events". Huh? The thing I like a
by jart 5y ago
According to that page "the main reason Alpine aims to replace" OpenRC is they want the init system to "interface with external events". Huh? The thing I like about OpenRC is is if I `grep -R socket` on its codebase then it comes up empty. Alpine seems to be leaning towards s6 according to that page, which appears to have a treasure trove of network services. Last thing I want is to wake up one morning after updating Alpine and have all these scampering daemons like skadnsd, s6-fdholderd, s6-sudod, s6-ipcserverd, s6-ftrigrd, s6lockd, and ucspilogd skulking in the background. Also the boldness of the name. If you name it System 6 then you're claiming you've built something better than Bell System V. The init process has total power over the rest of userspace. I'm sorry but I don't think your system administration paradigm that MiTMs DNS deserves to be /sbin/init. I just want a UNIX-like system with few opinions that stays out of the way.
- CameronNemo 5y agoThose last four s6-* programs are not daemons. They are chain loading programs that modify permissions or the environment then exec into the next program in the chain.
- medstrom 5y agoTo be frank s6 and its cousins like runit have so much fewer lines of code -- I'm pretty sure it's fewer than OpenRC and traditional SysV both -- because of simple and thought-through architecture. If you're gonna do a systemd alternative at all, ever, it'd have to be on one of these sane foundations.