On Sat 28 Oct 2023 at 06:29:19 (+0200), to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 02:46:55PM -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > >> > https://wiki.debian.org/EnvironmentVariables > > >> It needs some TLC: > > >> [quote] > > >> 1. At the end of booting, the mother of all processes -- init -- is > > >> started. > > >> 2. init runs services as described above. > > >> [/quote] > > >> > > >> Isn't this rather obsolete as long as systemd has been with us? > > > > > > Systemd is just an init by another name. It's process 1 and still > > > is the mother of all processes. > > > > I don't think there's a need to defend the status quo: the above page > > may not be fully incorrect, but it is misleading (especially since the > > `init` is given a monospace font, > > This is misleading indeed. A bit of more detail won't hurt, i.e. that > you can tell your kernel to use another init in the command line (that's > how systemd gets started: "init=/lib/systemd", AFAIK)
I think more detail /does/ hurt, as does the edit of 2023-10-27 23:03:36 (though I'm not trying to criticise your best of intentions). The focus of the page should be . what environment variables are and how they're set/used, . the ones that are set by the system and/or are expected by any linux user, . where they can be, and are, set under different login regimes, . the su change. I think this wiki page should attempt (even if it can't necessarily succeed) to answer the FAQ expressed in the Subject line above, and not get filled with extraneous information. The Quick Start and Notes and Exceptions are reasonable, except for the latest addition, "SysV, Systemd and init". There's a "BootProcess" wiki page where this would be a better fit, and this page needs a lot of updating for modern times. Then there's an "Init" wiki page for describing the two flavours, systemd and sysv, and comparing and contrasting them. This should stick to inits that bring up a Debian system, about which there's plenty to say. After all, "Init's /job/ is to start other programs that are essential to the operation of your system." But telling the kernel to start an arbitrary process doesn't give it that /job/, so that option should be treated under either a boot or a system recovery (the typical use) page. > > to suggest it's an actual program name > > rather than just the name used to refer to the concept of the initial > > process). > > Agreed. > > > Even saying that "At the end of boot the mother of all processes init is > > started" is quite confusing, IMO: while it might be true that it happens > > when the *kernel* finishes the boot, I personally tend to consider this > > to be rather closer the beginning than the end of the overall > > boot process. > > The one person's boots are another person's socks, true. The range of > "boot" goes from the boot loader loading the kernel up to some desktop > environment up and ready. Yes, and there's a sequence of wiki pages (some a bit rusty) available for each step. Cheers, David.
