3 ms·
As a rule of thumb, it's good to distrust products when you know that the politics behind have been loud enough to be heard widely. But the sharp razor which wi
by return0 12y ago
As a rule of thumb, it's good to distrust products when you know that the politics behind have been loud enough to be heard widely. But the sharp razor which will decide if systemd is better is simplicity. Those who have switched, is systemd simpler than sysvInit?
- jerven 12y agoYes, declarative unit files are simpler than Turing complete shell scripts.
- sethrin 12y agoSimplicity is not necessarily a good measure of suitability. See this: http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/2414.html http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/2414.html There are some aspects of systemd that are simpler than sysvinit. The mess of double-forking and PID files goes away, and process management is much more reliable. Setting up containers for services is much simpler. Unit files are generally much simpler than a given init script. I think more useful adages ("boned wisdom for weak teeth" - AB) would be, "Everything should be as simple as possible, but no simpler," and "Simple things should be simple, complex things should be possible." There is an enormous amount of complexity inherent in the problem of initializing and monitoring a modern OS. If your solution to this is actually simple, it is probably wrong or incomplete. How you manage that complexity and what your abstraction layers are are the vital questions.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]