|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

The road forward for systemd

The road forward for systemd

Posted May 31, 2010 16:26 UTC (Mon) by mezcalero (subscriber, #45103)
In reply to: The road forward for systemd by nybble41
Parent article: The road forward for systemd

Well, my point was that I claim that a full turing-complete programming language should not be necessary to start up most services. Instead we should just identify common code in the various init scripts and make them available directly in the init system via a simple option in the .service file or in the daemons themselves. I am quite sure that for a few services this will not work out we we will still need a shell script for them. But that's fine, it will then just spawn a shell script which as last step simply execs the real daemon. But again, there is really no need for a shell interpreter for the majority of services, and hence let's just get rid of it.


to post comments

The road forward for systemd

Posted May 31, 2010 18:21 UTC (Mon) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

Exactly. What would be worthy of disparagement was if you'd decided that we *could* no longer use shell script fragments to start services. But, really, the repetitive umpty-Kb-long shell scripts to start random daemons on current systems are just ridiculous. Most of that isn't needed to *start the daemon* at all (BSD-style boot scripts didn't need it), but to provide the other services (stop/restart, easy reconfiguration via stuff in /etc/default et al) that the distribution needs. And *that* doesn't really belong in *every single* startup script. Better to centralize it.


Copyright © 2025, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds