Very true, but something always seems to say something along the lines of "if we had done #2 years ago, we might have avoided a huge mess that now exists".
Runit could have been the successor to sysvinit years ago, but like anything, unless there is something tangible to import with less work, rather than more work, things don't go into usage.
To put it another way, if CUPS had no drivers how useful would it be?
The same applies to init systems. If there are ready to use feet wetting, taste testing scripts ready to go, the job of importing things just gets easier on the distribution.
I often think and wonder if this was part of the allure of systemd, and I'm possibly correct.
Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: Steve Litt<mailto:slitt_at_troubleshooters.com>
Sent: 6/16/2015 4:45 AM
To: supervision_at_list.skarnet.org<mailto:supervision_at_list.skarnet.org>
Subject: Re: comparison
On Tue, 16 Jun 2015 04:05:29 -0700
James Powell <james4591_at_hotmail.com> wrote:
> I agree Laurent. Though, even though complete init+supervision
> systems like Runit exist, it's been nearly impossible to get a
> foothold with any alternatives to sysvinit and systemd effectively. I
> think one of the major setbacks has been the lack of ready-to-use
> script sets, like those included with OpenRC, various rehashes of
> sysvinit and bsdinit scripts, and systemd units just aren't there
> ready to go.
>
> Testing and trying to debug in house scripts is a pain and to be
> honest stalled our work with LFS a while back.
>
> Runit is one of the most complete alternatives out there, but if
> scripts are what is holding things back, why has this never been
> accurately addressed?
>
> -Jim
I think part of the difficulty of writing run scripts is there are two
different kinds of runscripts:
1) Simple system specific custom made run script.
2) Works everywhere, regardless of software constellation, one size
fits all run script.
Distros and packages and "upstreams" make #2, which are very, very,
very difficult. In my Suckless Init plus daemontools-encore adventure,
I had a 200+ line "one size fits all" sysvinit init script degenerate
into a less than 20 line system specific daemontools-encore run script.
Personally, if I were a Linux distribution script maker, at the very
least I would assume I'm working with the Linux kernel and the "stuff"
provided by the distro release for which the script was made. That
would cut down on a lot of the tl;dr cotton candy.
SteveT
Steve Litt
June 2015 featured book: The Key to Everyday Excellence
http://www.troubleshooters.com/key
Received on Tue Jun 16 2015 - 12:22:48 UTC