Well, Fedora 14 Will Not Ship On Time

[curaga]

Well, there's still the question of why would I want my init tracking my daemons?

[droidhacker]

I wonder, when was the last fedora release thst was on scedule? Could that be fedora 8 or 9? (one of the most crappy fedora releases btw)

Fedora has a pattern of EVEN=CRAP, ODD=perfect. F8 was TERRIBLE. F9 was probably the strongest release ever.

[V!NCENT]

Well, there's still the question of why would I want my init tracking my daemons?

So init can stop them and see if new ones need to be launched.

For axample if you do not have bluetooth dongle in a usb port at startup then systemd will not start a bluetooth daemon at start. So when you insert a bluetooth dongle when your system is already running, systemd will check if a bluetooth daemon is running. If there isn't any then it will start one. When you unplug your the dongle from usb then systemd will heck its processes and if there is a bluetooth daemon it will stop it.

Imagine those KDE crashes; KDE triggers the d-bus bug and d-bus crashes. SystemD tracks daemons and thus it sees that d-bus has crashed. No problem; systemd will simply restart d-bus. Now you might think "well KDE still crashes as a result". No it does not. Systemd presents, while it is running, as al sorts of fake sockets. One of them is d-bus. These fake sockets are IPC buffers. So d-bus crashed, the fake d-bus socket will keep buffering IPC while it restarts d-bus and then feed d-bus the IPC from KDE it has stored in the fake d-bus socket.

SystemD will keep buffering until a syncronisation needs to take place and then simply put the proces requesting the sync on hold untill another proces is up and running.

This is why systemd can start up Linux as fast as Mac OS X' launchd can because it represents fake socket buffers during startup so even with dependancies everything can boot up simultaniously. So for example if something relies on D-bus, then it can be launched even before d-bus is running

[AdamW]

What I don't get is, even if you need a replacement for SysVinit, why does everyone feel they have to reinvent the wheel and write their own 'better' replacement of it. It's this ego issue that makes FOSS people so unbearable at times.

There's fefe's minit: http://www.fefe.de/minit/

I have been using it on Debian for a while and I have yet to come across problems. Could anyone point me out why it doesn't get adopted by any distro?

Lennart has a blog post on it. He proposed all the ideas he implemented in systemd as improvements to upstart, but the upstart team doesn't agree with some of them, so he decided to implement them in a separate project.

[susikala]

Lennart has a blog post on it. He proposed all the ideas he implemented in systemd as improvements to upstart, but the upstart team doesn't agree with some of them, so he decided to implement them in a separate project.

Well, I wasn't really talking about systemd as I don't know it. I was just wondering why people have to reinvent tools when there are working alternatives. It's a waste of time and duplication of code for mostly ego reasons.

[V!NCENT]

Well, I wasn't really talking about systemd as I don't know it. I was just wondering why people have to reinvent tools when there are working alternatives. It's a waste of time and duplication of code for mostly ego reasons.

People are not happy with the code because they think that they cannot use it for what they want to create/solve/reach?

Realy... If anything humans tend to take the lazy road wherever they can.

[nanonyme]

Well, I wasn't really talking about systemd as I don't know it. I was just wondering why people have to reinvent tools when there are working alternatives. It's a waste of time and duplication of code for mostly ego reasons.

Often it's about licenses. But yeah, in this case there really is no really good init system excluding perhaps the one Gentoo has/had. At least I've been told upstart doesn't handle init dependency trees properly and thus you can end up with situations where eg ntp starts even when the system starts without network.

[susikala]

Often it's about licenses. But yeah, in this case there really is no really good init system excluding perhaps the one Gentoo has/had. At least I've been told upstart doesn't handle init dependency trees properly and thus you can end up with situations where eg ntp starts even when the system starts without network.

I'm sorry to be rude, but could someone finally here answer _ad rem_ instead of talking about other init systems? What are minit's faults that would speak against its adoption, per example? (And there are other systems I haven't mentioned.)

I really feel like an idiot for having to ask the same question for the _third_ time now.

[nanonyme]

I'm sorry to be rude, but could someone finally here answer _ad rem_ instead of talking about other init systems? What are minit's faults that would speak against its adoption, per example? (And there are other systems I haven't mentioned.)

Oh, right. Your bad then, you didn't ask that question the last time.