> Am 15.08.2012 11:21, schrieb Kevin Chadwick: > >> I'd love to see the overall advantages and disadvantages of each of > >> those fleshed out on a page where I can read them > > > > Here's one part > > > > A good design would make the init process which is always running and > > everyone must run. > > > > 1./ Be a small simple binary > > The systemd main binary is not very large (larger than sysvinit's > /sbin/init, but not by much). > Just 26 times as large and who knows how many times more complicated. > > 2./ Have no dependencies > > That is pure BS. If something has no dependencies, it has to do > everything in the binary itself. You either end up with no features, or > potential for tons of bugs. > No it has the potential and freedom to do anything or nothing without the overhead of copying a much larger binary when forking processes or imposing any limitations. > Having NO dependencies also means you have to bypass the C library and > implement everything from scratch - that is the worst idea ever. > Twisting my words yet again like so many other posts which are pro systemd. Without a C library which was invented as the heart of UNIX you wouldn't have a UNIX-like OS or any general OS including Windows. Here's a list of dependencies for you. There are likely many kernel CONFIG options and modules required than the couple listed here and likely growing. cgroups, dbus, ipv6, udev, kmod, pam, libcap I'll respect the devs wishes now no matter how wrong any posts about this subject are or how compelled I am to correct the record. -- _______________________________________________________________________ 'Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a universal interface' (Doug McIlroy) _______________________________________________________________________
