Nils Philippsen <nphilipp@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> I think, nobody doubts that current initsystem is the worst one of
>> the major linux distributions.
>
> Can the hyperbole please -- we know what we have otherwise we wouldn't
> be having this discussion.
I can not remember how long there are discussions about replacing
RH's initsystem (perhaps 5-6 years), and nothing happened. Other
distributions implemented more (upstart, syslog-ng) or less (suse,
mandriva) innovative methods in the meantime. And now, RH tries to
write its own implementation by adding some d-bus features and using
a bloaty scripting language around current initscripts?
>> By changing paradigm from forking to non-forking daemon you can avoid
>> all the complicated 'stop' code; e.g. 'start' will be
>>
>> | pid = fork();
>> | if (pid==0) { /* ... */ execve(...); }
>>
>> and 'stop' be
>>
>> | kill(pid, SIGTERM); /* wait for timeout/sigchld */ kill(pid, SIGKILL);
>
> That'd be all fine and dandy for daemons that simply need to be
> started
how much resp. which daemons are not in this category?
> without any variable options
options are trivially to solve; e.g. by an easy to parse one-option-per-line
configuration file or by 'argv = --foo --bar' stylish options in the service
description file.
> or preparations
trivially to be solved by executing helper scripts instead of the daemon
itself
| #!/bin/sh
| ... do something ...
| exec <daemon> "$@"
Or, by using syslog-ng ideas of scripts (which terminate) and daemons
(which stay running), you can split complicated preparation code and
simple startup code in a way like
--- daemons/foo ---
require = scripts/foo
daemon = /usr/sbin/foo
--- scripts/foo ---
exec = /usr/libexec/foo-prepare
> and are obliging enough to write pid files.
pid files are an anachronism required for initsystems with forking
daemons
> I don't think that e.g. the postgresql
works perfectly in this way; e.g. I start it with
| /usr/bin/setuidgid postgres /usr/bin/postmaster -D /var/lib/pgsql/data
>> But python or other bloaty scripting languages are not a solution and
>> completely unacceptable at this place.
>
> "Bloaty" is something that could be solved, don't you think?
Not with python or perl. Perhaps lua. But I really do not see why an
extra scripting language is required for the initsystem. sh/bash is
perfect for doing potential preparation tasks.
> bash takes up about 5.1MB.
you mean the 750kb sized 'bash' binary and the >4 MB documentation plus
locale files?
Enrico
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
