On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 07:54:33 +0200, Edward Bartolo wrote:
[...]
> I think it is a mistake to expect a few lines of code written in
> whatever language to outperform other init projects written in several
> thousand lines of code that are well debugged and mature. The place
> for these little scripts, as I see it, is for educational purposes and
> to power small computers like the Raspberry Pi,

*Definitely* *not*! The smaller the machine, the more efficient
the code should be. And having an interpreter as yet another layer
of complexity (besides the C library) between the kernel and the
PID1 program is contra-productive in this regard. And, BTW, your
Script in it's current form is still missing some essential features
(i.e. setsid, setpgid) to make it actually work as intended.
And no, it is not a good idea to delegate that task to the exec'ed
program (I leave it as an exercise for the reader to find out why).
And yes, I will continue to point out errors and debunk misconceptions
in your posts, for the benefit of the elusive "innocent reader" of
DNG.

As for the educational value: I fail to see what good does learning
things already proven wrong.

> and maybe, to power
> the computer of enthusiast adolescent computer geeks who want to
> understand what goes on inside their operating system. Mind you, this
> is not a deep look inside what happens when an operating system boots,

Correct, in that it represents a superficial and wrong and view, and
it paints a warped picture of the things *actually* happening.

> but it is better than having nothing, or worse of being presented
> with mystery where logic should prevail.

If 16 lines of C pose a mystery, one should look for another hobby.
Or get a clue already.

Regards
Urban