Where will you go after systemd?

Here you can discuss every aspect of Debian. Note: not for support requests!

Where will you go after systemd?

BSD
12
16%
Linux without systemd
34
47%
Mac
2
3%
Windows
0
No votes
something totally different
1
1%
have not decided yet
24
33%
 
Total votes : 73

Re: Where will you go after systemd?

Postby Moonshine » 2015-02-26 13:44

1of12 wrote:Slackware uses the sysvinit daemon


Slackware uses init daemon. There's. as you said, "no such thing" as sysvinit daemon. Do you think sysv owns init or what?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Init

Sysvinit is init + sysv scripts.
BSD-init is init + bsd scripts.

BSD scripts are much easier way to boot up your computer. That's not only my opinion.
User avatar
Moonshine
 
Posts: 38
Joined: 2015-02-11 22:10
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

Re: Where will you go after systemd?

Postby 1of12 » 2015-02-26 14:19

Your source is wikipedia...?

My first source is the source:

https://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/sysvinit
http://download.savannah.gnu.org/releases/sysvinit/

My second source is the Slackware source:

http://mirrors.slackware.com/slackware/ ... /sysvinit/

Finally Debian:

https://packages.debian.org/source/wheezy/sysvinit

Note the version numbers being identical between Slackware and Debian (sysvinit hasn't seen much development for years) and project being called "sysvinit"...

As I said: "Your research/knowledge is lacking."
1of12
 
Posts: 27
Joined: 2015-02-23 09:38

Re: Where will you go after systemd?

Postby Moonshine » 2015-02-26 14:38

My main source is Slackware website, which has a rather conclusive disclaimer on this topic.

http://www.slackware.com/config/init.php

It is interesting that the actual init that is used by Slackware is actually the same that's in sysvinit. I didn't know that.
If we go up a directory, there's also sysvinit-scripts directory, but in contains this:
http://mirrors.slackware.com/slackware/ ... s/scripts/

These are not sysvinit-scripts. Why they are called sysvinit-scripts - I don't know. Do you?

Still, it's not the daemon that makes up for init system. It's daemon+scripts. So what I said in previous post.

Sysvinit is init + sysv scripts.
BSD-init is init + bsd scripts.

BSD scripts are much easier way to boot up your computer. That's not only my opinion.
User avatar
Moonshine
 
Posts: 38
Joined: 2015-02-11 22:10
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

Re: Where will you go after systemd?

Postby 1of12 » 2015-02-26 16:41

Moonshine wrote:My main source is Slackware website, which has a rather conclusive disclaimer on this topic.

http://www.slackware.com/config/init.php

The Slackware website is correct, your interpretation of it is wrong. It says nothing about not using sysvinit.
Slackware Linux uses the BSD-style file layout for its system initialization files

The often used word "style" should give it away.

If you can invoke init from the terminal as root to change run levels, then you are running sysvinit - simple as that.
Moonshine wrote:It is interesting that the actual init that is used by Slackware is actually the same that's in sysvinit. I didn't know that.

sysvinit is the init system used in Slackware. It uses sysvinit + BSD style rc scripts.

Moonshine wrote:If we go up a directory, there's also sysvinit-scripts directory, but in contains this:
http://mirrors.slackware.com/slackware/ ... s/scripts/

These are not sysvinit-scripts. Why they are called sysvinit-scripts - I don't know. Do you?

They're sysvinit scripts because they're used with sysvinit. The fact that they're 'BSD style' does not make them BSD init scripts or the init system they're running on some kind of *BSD init. You also won't find inittab and those run level scripts on any *BSD operating system. The *BSDs do not use sysvinit at all, for various reasons - though just for starts, the licence is a show stopper. Each *BSD has it's own init system derived/forked from the original 386BSD/4.2BSD/4.4BSD-lite code bases.

Moonshine wrote:Still, it's not the daemon that makes up for init system. It's daemon+scripts. So what I said in previous post.

Sysvinit is init + sysv scripts.
BSD-init is init + bsd scripts.

BSD scripts are much easier way to boot up your computer. That's not only my opinion.

On the contrary, what you said in the previous post is still completely false.
1of12
 
Posts: 27
Joined: 2015-02-23 09:38

Re: Where will you go after systemd?

Postby Moonshine » 2015-02-26 17:21

1of12 wrote:The Slackware website is correct, your interpretation of it is wrong. It says nothing about not using sysvinit.


System V Compatibility
Since version 7.0, Slackware includes System V init compatibility. Many other Linux distributions make use of this style instead of the BSD style. Basically each runlevel is given a subdirectory for init scripts, whereas BSD style gives one init script to each runlevel.


How and why do you include compatibility with something you're supposedly already using?
Before 7.0 Slackware didn't understand the directory-based runlevel approach of sysvinit. After rc.sysvinit was included, it does.

1of12 wrote:If you can invoke init from the terminal as root to change run levels, then you are running sysvinit

1of12 wrote:sysvinit is the init system used in Slackware. It uses sysvinit + BSD style rc scripts.


I'm talking about init system, not init file. OpenRC is an init-system that uses init file too. OpenRC isn't sysvinit even if it uses init file provided by sysvinit.

1of12 wrote:They're sysvinit scripts because they're used with sysvinit. The fact that they're 'BSD style' does not make them BSD init scripts or the init system they're running on some kind of *BSD init.

We seem to have major terminology differences. And BSD-init isn't something I came up with, it's how it is referred to all over the place

http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Comparison_of_init_systems
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hints/d ... d-init.txt

I will say "BSD style init", if it suits you better. It still means the same thing.
User avatar
Moonshine
 
Posts: 38
Joined: 2015-02-11 22:10
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

Re: Where will you go after systemd?

Postby twoflowers » 2015-02-26 18:52

This discussion is off topic. Please open a new thread if you like to discuss philosophical aspects of calling names to different parts init systems.
twoflowers
 

Re: Where will you go after systemd?

Postby 1of12 » 2015-02-26 22:27

Moonshine wrote:How and why do you include compatibility with something you're supposedly already using?
Before 7.0 Slackware didn't understand the directory-based runlevel approach of sysvinit. After rc.sysvinit was included, it does.

Slackware uses BSD style rc scripts, it was not compatible with sysv style scripts as set up.
Moonshine wrote:I'm talking about init system, not init file. OpenRC is an init-system that uses init file too. OpenRC isn't sysvinit even if it uses init file provided by sysvinit.

OpenRC is just based on sysvinit. They can use whatever wording they like. The file they refer to as /sbin/init is sysvinit, it's not the /sbin/init from e.g. OpenBSD or NetBSD. When they refer to /sbin/init as it's Linux, there is the automatic assumption that it's sysvinit.
Moonshine wrote:We seem to have major terminology differences. And BSD-init isn't something I came up with, it's how it is referred to all over the place

Terminology is not the issue, that would be a small matter, you don't seem to understand that "BSD init" does not really exist in the way you think it does. I argued for a start that Slackware used the sysvinit daemon, you responded to that in the negative, without actually knowing that it does use the same /sbin/init.

I would suggest asking on the LQ Slackware forum if you require further clarification.
1of12
 
Posts: 27
Joined: 2015-02-23 09:38

Re: Where will you go after systemd?

Postby Hralgmir » 2015-03-01 22:22

golinux wrote:
JLloyd13 wrote:If its that easy why are people still forking Debian over it?

Because it's about more than init. It is the entanglement of depends that is the glue that binds systemd to places where is unnecessary except to tie it to the systemd monolith.


Extract from linux kernel source /Documentation/sysfs-rules.txt

The kernel-exported sysfs exports internal kernel implementation details
and depends on internal kernel structures and layout. It is agreed upon
by the kernel developers that the Linux kernel does not provide a stable
internal API. Therefore, there are aspects of the sysfs interface that
may not be stable across kernel releases.

To minimize the risk of breaking users of sysfs, which are in most cases
low-level userspace applications, with a new kernel release, the users
of sysfs must follow some rules to use an as-abstract-as-possible way to
access this filesystem. The current udev and HAL programs already
implement this and users are encouraged to plug, if possible, into the
abstractions these programs provide instead of accessing sysfs directly.

So systemd apparently combines udev (abstraction to an unstable kernel interface) with a boot manager. I'll probably give it a try though when I switch to the next stable version of Debian as it will be useful to know how it works if it is popular elsewhere. With Red Hat software in general though, given their free / premium model then the free software is unlikely to be as good as the premium version I would guess, and lack a certain amount of functionality in comparison.

Edit:
Reading the link referenced here:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=118319&start=225
Later versions of systemd will also replace Grub / Lilo and the computer BIOS as they incorporate the "gummiboot" UEFI boot manager - these exist now but earlier versions are apparently being used in Debian at present.

From gummiboot source code: (the name gummiboot is a joke in German, as it means inflatable rubber boat)
This file is part of systemd.
Copyright 2013 Lennart Poettering
Copyright 2013 Kay Sievers

systemd also includes readahead, previously a separate package. Installing the readahead-fedora package reduced my boot time by ~20 seconds, the first boot is slow as it sets itself up, later boots are faster. readahead-fedora can be optimised in various ways.

Further edit:
Red Hat intend to replace the X11 graphical interface with Wayland. Ubuntu are working on Mir as an alternative but it hasn't been so widely accepted as Wayland so far.
Credit should go to Ubuntu for providing alternatives from the "Debian based" community.
Last edited by Hralgmir on 2015-04-15 21:34, edited 2 times in total.
Hralgmir
 
Posts: 48
Joined: 2012-07-16 01:05

Re: Where will you go after systemd?

Postby tomazzi » 2015-03-03 00:45

dasein wrote:Some may find it informative: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=120652

Dasein:
I don't know how could this happen, but somehow I've mislooked Your post. I've never supposed that I'll say this, but I want to apologise You. This post is just briliant, and summarises everything that could be said about systemd.

Regards.
Odi profanum vulgus
tomazzi
 
Posts: 730
Joined: 2013-08-02 21:33

Re: Where will you go after systemd?

Postby dasein » 2015-03-03 04:06

@tomazzi: I'm flattered by your kind words, thank you. No apology necessary.

However, as long as I have your attention in a calm moment, I do want to mention that you mistook our last exchange as an attack when it was exactly the opposite: a show of moral support. What I was trying to say is this: your concerns, while insightful, incisive, and exactly correct, simply weren't something most folks here were going to be able to appreciate. (No offense intended to FDNLand, just stating a fact.) That's all.
User avatar
dasein
 
Posts: 7775
Joined: 2011-03-04 01:06
Location: Terra Incantationum

Re: Where will you go after systemd?

Postby DebbyIan » 2015-03-26 13:01

sysV all the way.
DebbyIan
 
Posts: 157
Joined: 2013-05-09 12:12

Re: Where will you go after systemd?

Postby debianized » 2015-04-11 20:39

[XXXXXX@localhost ~]$ systemd-analyze blame
6.343s systemd-journald.service
5.552s ufw.service
3.056s man-db.service
1.840s home.mount
1.749s systemd-journal-flush.service
1.281s systemd-vconsole-setup.service
1.221s NetworkManager.service
1.080s systemd-backlight@backlight:intel_backlight.service
1.065s systemd-udevd.service
1.028s dnsmasq.service
724ms polkit.service
654ms systemd-tmpfiles-setup-dev.service
455ms alsa-restore.service
445ms systemd-user-sessions.service
393ms systemd-udev-trigger.service
377ms systemd-sysctl.service
333ms systemd-remount-fs.service
310ms shadow.service
231ms logrotate.service
205ms systemd-random-seed.service
195ms udisks2.service
194ms systemd-rfkill@rfkill0.service
186ms systemd-tmpfiles-clean.service
150ms kmod-static-nodes.service
120ms user@1000.service
113ms systemd-logind.service
83ms dev-sda8.swap
76ms upower.service
69ms avahi-daemon.service
62ms sys-kernel-debug.mount
61ms dev-hugepages.mount
48ms wpa_supplicant.service
43ms systemd-update-utmp.service
33ms systemd-tmpfiles-setup.service
22ms sys-kernel-config.mount
21ms dev-mqueue.mount
15ms tmp.mount
debianized
 
Posts: 278
Joined: 2009-01-07 07:56

Previous

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests

fashionable