On 22/07/2015 10:00, 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 Oz,

Don't believe everything you read on the Web. ;)
The author of the article has already adopted systemd's point of view, which
is "one init should do everything", without even being aware of it.

The truth it, you're perfectly right: it is not init's job to manage hot-
pluggable devices. There is NO reason why init should be made aware of
those kernel events, and the "systemd can manage modern hardware" meme is
but a pile of propaganda.
Any init system, including sysvinit, will work just as well: managing
hotplug is udev's job, and anything implementing udev functionality will
do. udev predates systemd, so systemd did not invent the feature; it
just took udev and integrated it tightly to make itself unavoidable,
a.k.a. virus tactics.

eudev and vdev, as well as other udev-like daemons, prove this is not
necessary. So you can safely ignore the article, written by someone who
has a wrong idea of what init is supposed to do.

--
Laurent