| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Shamus397
Apprentice
Joined: 03 Apr 2005
Posts: 218
Location: Ur-th
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 31, 2014 4:18 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Well, like I said before, Sys V init already does process management, so it's more like SystemD took the idea from Sys V init and turned it into a festering pile of failure. 
At any rate, I have start-stop-daemon communicating with init now but still have a few issues to iron out. Will post a small patch to s-s-d once I work it out.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 31, 2014 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Shamus397 wrote: | | Well, like I said before, Sys V init already does process management |
Yeah it does, but only at a simplistic level; enough to manage getty on console lines, and to respawn whatever the user wants. The singleton actions are nice too (eg for xdm.)
Anything more complex, like actually starting all the services in the correct order, respecting both specified and configured dependencies, and monitoring etc, has to happen elsewhere. Parsimony dictates that it be in another process, since it doesn't absolutely have to be in pid1, nor is there any conceivable benefit to an admin to it being in pid1. Only pitfalls, for both maintenance and users, as well as system robustness.
| Quote: | | so it's more like SystemD took the idea from Sys V init and turned it into a festering pile of failure. ;) |
Yeah they think it's "kewl" to be pid1, seemingly as it gives them sort of feeling of control over the whole machine. Utter nonsense ofc, but the upstream does appear to be labouring under several delusions of grandeur and megalomania. Which dovetails nicely with delivering a locked-down machine to corporate and NSA clients.
| Quote: | | At any rate, I have start-stop-daemon communicating with init now but still have a few issues to iron out. Will post a small patch to s-s-d once I work it out. :) |
Nice one. :-) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shamus397
Apprentice
Joined: 03 Apr 2005
Posts: 218
Location: Ur-th
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2017 2:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So after 2 years of doing other things, I've finally gotten around to rewriting it in C. I've been testing it with good results and feel it's good enough to put into production.
The best way to use this, and be able to fall back on the old init if things don't work as they should for you, is to move init-ng (after you compile it, that is ) into /sbin and then add the kernel parameter 'init=/sbin/init-ng' (minus the quotes) to your bootloader config. That's probably the easiest, least intrusive way to run/test it.
Constructive comments and criticism are welcome as always. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khayyam
Watchman
Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shamus397
Apprentice
Joined: 03 Apr 2005
Posts: 218
Location: Ur-th
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2017 10:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There's no webpage for it yet, just a git repo:
http://shamusworld.gotdns.org/git/init-ng
& yes, mine has the dash where theirs doesn't. I'm open to a better name, maybe MiniInit? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Unsupported Software
