On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 10:32:16 -0500
Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Jonathan Billings
> <billings@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > It also is
> > significantly less-featureful than a shell programming language.
> > Yes, you're going to be using shell elsewhere, but in my
> > experience, the structure of most SysVinit scripts is nearly
> > identical, and where it deviates is where things often get
> > confusing to people not as familiar with shell scripting. Many of
> > the helper functions in /etc/rc.d/init.d/functions seem to exist to
> > STOP people from writing unique shell code in their init scripts.
>
> Yes, reusing common code and knowledge is a good thing. But spending
> a bit of time learning shell syntax will help you with pretty much
> everything else you'll ever do on a unix-like system, where spending
> that time learning a new way to make your program start at boot will
> just get you back to what you already could do on previous systems.
Les, I could re-use your logic to argue that one should never even try
to learn bash, and stick to C instead. Every *real* user of UNIX-like
systems should be capable of writing C code, which is used in so many
more circumstances than bash. C is so much more powerful, more
expressive, immensely faster, covers a broader set of use-cases, is
being used in so many more circumstances than bash, is far more generic,
and in the long run it's a good investment in programming skills and
knowledge.
Why would you ever want to start your system using some clunky
shell-based interpreter like bash, (which cannot even share memory
between processes in a native way), when you can simply write a short
piece of C code, fork() all your services, compile it, and run?
All major pieces of any UNIX-like system were traditionally written in
C, so what would be the point of ever introducing a less powerful
language like bash, and doing the system startup in that?
And if you really insist on writing commands interactively into a
command prompt, you are welcome to use tcsh, and reuse all the syntax
and well-earned knowledge of C, rather than invest time to learn
yet-another-obscure-scripting-language...
Right? Or not?
If not, you may want to reconsider your argument against systemd ---
it's simple, clean, declarative, does one thing and does it well, and
it doesn't pretend to be a panacea of system administration like bash
does.
HTH, :-)
Marko
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
