On Sat, 16 May 2020 11:41:29 +0200
Antony Stone <Antony.Stone@???> wrote:

> On Saturday 16 May 2020 at 11:30:03, Steve Litt wrote:
>
> > You know, runit's or s6's process supervisor could be used, on
> > systemd systems, as a tobacco patch to wean the user off systemd,
> > one process at a time. As each daemon gets moved to runit or s6,
> > that daemon's unit file name gets put in a shellscript that
> > disables systemd's execution of that daemon. It's very easy to do.
>
> Surely one of the biggest problems (or at least, one of the things
> people complain most about) regarding systemd is that it is no longer
> just an init system.
>
> It may have been sold that way in the early days, but it's now
> infiltrated so many parts of the GNU / Linux system that just telling
> people (or showing them) that they can use something else to manage
> their daemons is no longer enough.

Your two preceding paragraphs are absolutely true, which is why s6
supervisor as a patch is an excellent tactic in the strategy to one by
one either/both limit systemd damage and/or replace systemd
functionalities.

Another benefit if s6 as a tobacco patch and later tobacco patches: The
more DIY types who do these things, the more collective knowledge will
be available to call bullshit on the nonsense propagated by the
Redhat/Freedesktop/Poettering axis and their chatterbox repeaters.

My preceding paragraph is the carrot. The stick is that if we let
systemd get too far ahead of us, it will become too bubble-gummed into
our systems to ever remove.

Just speaking for myself, I think a great intermediate goal for Devuan
would be to keep the sysvinit PID1, and use it with the process
supervisor for s6. s6 is still under active development and is getting
**good** features all the time, while remaining simple and logical.

SteveT

Steve Litt 
May 2020 featured book: Troubleshooting Techniques
     of the Successful Technologist
http://www.troubleshooters.com/techniques