:: Re: [Dng] Combatting revisionist hi…
Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Didier Kryn
Date:  
To: dng
Subject: Re: [Dng] Combatting revisionist history

Le 25/02/2015 22:11, Go Linux a écrit :
> This excellent analysis of the systemd debacle was just posted over on FDN. Should be required reading IMO. Enjoy!
>
> http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=120652&p=570371
>
> golinux
> _______________________________________________
> Dng mailing list
> Dng@???
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

     Thanks Go Linux for this post. I didn't follow thhe battle inside 
Debian; therefore it's interesting to read a point of view on the story.


     I like the jokes about the Fork posted  in the replies. I see 
Devuan on the clear side of the Fork.


     About init in general, and first of all about systemd, I always 
thought there was an abuse in the terminology and in the implementation, 
which I would like to explain below:


     Well, there are two pecularities in process #1:


     a) it is the first process started by the kernel, and, as such, it 
is in charge of starting all the necessary services.
     b) it adopts the orphans


     These two things are very different and I am amazed that one can 
call "init" the process in charge to adopt the orphans and eventually 
re-launch them, and moreover shut down the system.


     Init proper, when it has finished starting the system, should 
exec() another application, in charge of maintaining it alive; and this 
other should exec() yet another one for shutdown. There is no reason to 
put all these delicate jobs in only one application. exec() does not 
change the pid.


     The Fork be with Devuan, yeah!