The road forward for systemd

Posted May 27, 2010 0:10 UTC (Thu) by dbenamy (guest, #39458)
In reply to: The road forward for systemd by mezcalero
Parent article: The road forward for systemd

I've read the whole blog post and your comments and I'm not sure I understand how you're answering the question. Sure inetd and systemd have different intended purposes, but that doesn't mean the mechanism isn't the same. I guess I'm wondering, is there any difference between the socket portion of systemd and running inetd early at boot to manage all the services mentioned with it's "keep the daemon running" mode?

The road forward for systemd

Posted May 27, 2010 6:39 UTC (Thu) by mezcalero (subscriber, #45103) [Link]

ok, here's another try to explain this. in systemd there are three phases:

1. we set up all sockets, af_inet and af_unix.
2. after that is done, we start all daemons at the same time
3. and then, the kernel figures everything else out for us, for free

in inetd you only have the first step, and it is mostly about af_inet, not af_unix.

(this is a a simplification btw, its a bit more complex in reality.)

this is explained in the "parallelizing socket services" part of the original blog post.