On 04/25/12 23:54, Rashif Ray Rahman wrote: > On 25 April 2012 23:25, Tom Gundersen <teg@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> I strongly believe that should we move away from intscripts it needs >> to be to an event-driven system (such as systemd or upstart) and it >> was not clear from the webpage that OpenRC provides this. >> > I concur. > > Although the current init works for me and won't encourage me to shift to > things like systemd anytime soon, efforts towards introducing alternatives > would have to be justified by how much more they're able to bring to the > table. And how many antifeatures they have ;) For me the feature list of systemd is kinda nice, it's obviously more comprehensive than the "old" init systems, but it goes against the unix spirit of having one tool for a job, and do this job well. Having all the features and being able to not have the antifeatures is what makes OpenRC extra nice ... > Simply being different or offering a few bonuses won't be enough, > IMO. Systemd is something dynamic and is what fits that ideal model, a > model which satisfies the needs of the present and hopefully the future. "dynamic" how? People have thrown "event based" and such words around, but no one has dared to clarify or properly define what they mean by it. Thus I can't understand if there's anything missing in OpenRC or people are just throwing words around because it feels good. > > Otherwise, I like my init as simple as it currently is. Dependency is never > a problem as it's very little work to manually ensure they're met. > You only realize what you're missing when you've lost it ;) For me not having dependencies is very frustrating, it makes restarting things so random and assumes that I know or care about who depends on what (hint: that's the job of the init system, not mine)
