On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 10:00:48AM +0200, Oz Tiram wrote:
> One argument I hear often about systemd is that it more adapted to current
> hardware needs, [e.g. here][1]
>
> > Computers changed so much that they often doesn’t even look like
> > computers. And their operating systems are very busy : GPS, wireless
> > networks, USB peripherals that come and go, tons of softwares and
> > services running at the same time, going to sleep / waking up in a
> > snap… Asking the antiquated SysVinit to manage all this is like asking
> > your grandmother to twerk.
>
> What I don't understand is how an init system manages hot pluggable
> devices.
> What does replacing a hot plugable disk drive it have to do with how the
> system is booted?
> Maybe this all done at the none init parts of systemd?

Hi,

exactly that: systemd has been merged with udev, which is a component that for
years has been built to create a device node tree and promptly do something in
hotplug situations, e.g. mount a pendrive when you plug it in the USB port.
If we think to systemd in two distinct manners, "the init system" and "the
genode framework written in C and incapable of interoperativity", we see that
systemd as a init is not a big deal, just an init tool that uses config files
and not shell scripts and handles parallelization and dependencies; the real
problems of freedom and quality of the product come with systemd as a
framework for bootstrapping a linux OS (be it the software itself or all the
drones who praise it as the "PHUUUUTUUUUOOOORE").

--
Teodoro Santoni

Something is wrong. I don't wanna compile 20 KB of Go code to list files.