On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 10:16:13AM -0500, Tom Horsley wrote: > > Since it was in D state, it probably issued a blocking system call that > > didn't return as expected and hung the application. > > Better question: Why is PID 1 the monolithic insanely complex "systemd" > program? Why isn't PID 1 just an "init" process that does nothing but > reap zombies and is much less likely to break due to some complex > operation going wrong, updates modifying libraries out from under it, etc? > Why not let all the complex stuff in systemd happen in PID 2? I don't think that's really a better question, because actually most of the complex other stuff _does_ happen in other processes. Take a look at /usr/lib/systemd for a variety of discrete parts. There are plenty of things which could be improved in systemd, but I don't see what tilting at entirely imaginary windmills accomplishes. -- Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Fedora Project Leader _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
