The reply below is for linux users/administrators in general, not for LFS users/administrators.
On 10.2.2014 20:49, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Armin K. wrote: >> On 02/10/2014 04:19 PM, Armin K. wrote: > >>> If you watched the video I posted few days ago, Lennart did mention that >>> there's a learning curve and if you got used to sysvinit you *need* to >>> learn systemd commands and such. Of course, those who spend >>> years/decades using shell will say that shell is easy, blah blah, etc, >>> but for beginners (<- note: beginners, newbies, no knowledge or very >>> limited one about shell) systemd is rather waaay easy to use and to >>> understand. >>> >>> Learning curve is there, but if you are at the beginnings, it's rather >>> way easier to learn systemd instead of shell. Of course, for some tasks >>> you'll still need shell, but mostly there's software for common things >>> that are being done on servers. Do note that not every server >>> needs/requires some special treatment, but there are actually lot of >>> them that do. > > There are multiple levels of learning. For a user or even a junior > administrator, systemd may be easier to use after the learning curve has > been accomplished. > > What is not easier, in my opinion, it learning what the boot process is > doing. What does sysV do beyond calling scripts? Very little. Most of > the work is done in very short scripts. Any Linux admin has to learn > scripting to be considered competent. Reading a startup script is > basically trivial. Understanding what is happening during the boot > process is fairly easy. > What systemd does is set up few builtin tasks, like basic stuff that's expected and required (more or less) to have on any linux os, then parse unit files which are in fairly understandable format and start the service as described in the unit file, in the order dependent on the scripts contents. Then it starts its other components, blah blah, and everything else. Not everyone wants to know about boot process. One does not need to be bothered with initial startup tasks which are mandatory for every single operating system unless he/she really wants that. > On the other hand, really trying to really understand systemd requires > delving into a lot of C code. That does not facilitate understanding. > Remember that even good documentation easily gets out of sync with the > code as maintenance changes are made. Even sysvinit has C code, so what? If you are speaking that way, you also need to learn the C code for Bash, Grep, Gawk, Coreutils (lots of them), etc to fully understand what's going on. As my message above says, not everyone wants to understand the most basic tasks that's used everywhere these days (mostly everywhere). > > In addition, systemd is meant to support arbitrary systems where the > hardware is quite variable and thousands of drivers and combinations of > packages are installed. LFS is targeted at users who can customize > their system to a degree much greater than any generalized distro. > > I guess I can summarize by saying that you don't want to use a fire hose > if you only want a drink of water. > > -- Bruce > -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
