On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 05:44:27 +0100 KatolaZ <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 09:37:11PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote: > > [cut] > > > > > Right now, Felker's PID1 is the acknowledged "Hello World" PID1. > > But as I remember you have to add an #include to get it to work with > > mainstream Linuxes, you have to get it to compile, and it's just > > not as understandable to non-C programmers. > > > > Hackers who might not know C are more able to put their own commands > > into the shellscript and see the result. > > > > With all the due respect, anyone can put a few lines in a shell script > or in a C code to create two devices and call rc. But we should be > honest and tell Bartolo, and anybody else willing to go down this > path, that this is not exactly "making a custom init", though, since > what is normally intended as "init" needs to be a tad more complicated > than that, if the intention is to make it useful outside a sandbox. Not really. I'm pretty sure that runit is pretty much a Suckless Init type PID1 spawning an rc file that runs a daemontools-like supervisor system. This is the whole point I've tried to get across to systemd afficianados: It really IS that simple. IIRC I ran my Daily Driver Desktop (DDD) for a couple days on Suckless Init PID1 plus a startup rc file calling daemontools-encore, and a shutdown script I pretty much made from scratch. I have no doubt that a process supervisor isn't trivial to create, but PID1 needn't contain a process supervisor: It can spawn a shellscript that launches the supervisor. SteveT Steve Litt June 2016 featured book: Troubleshooting: Why Bother? http://www.troubleshooters.com/twb _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list [email protected] https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
