| |||||||||||||
Poettering: The Biggest MythsPoettering: The Biggest MythsPosted Jan 28, 2013 17:31 UTC (Mon) by malor (subscriber, #2973)In reply to: Poettering: The Biggest Myths by lkundrak Parent article: Poettering: The Biggest Myths It's probably easier to get a junior administrator write a robust and correct service file than write a robust and correct sysvinit script. I haven't experimented yet with systemd, so I'm speaking from 50% ignorance, but sysvinit scripts are not simple things. We think of them as simple because we've invested the very large amount of time it takes to learn them well enough to write them properly. I think many of us have forgotten how hard that system was, back when we all started. There is a lot to know to write a startup script from scratch. Even after all these years, I usually copy other scripts and adapt them, rather than writing them from whole cloth, because there's so much to get exactly correct. From the examples in this thread, at least, it looks like systemd would be much easier. The major downside is that admins may not understand their systems as well, as more is being abstracted away, but that's been true of every abstraction that's ever been invented. Part of OS evolution is moving further and further from the bare metal, and I don't think that process is likely to stop anytime soon. The question is: are systemd's abstractions good ones? It seems like most folks think that they are.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|||||||||||||