On 06/17/2016 04:25 PM, KatolaZ <[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 09:44:56PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
>On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 08:19:12PM +0100, KatolaZ wrote:
> >Then you can provide any other alternative definition of "init
> >system", but if there is no procedure that does those things for you,
> >then you have to manually do those tasks, at each reboot. In that case
> >the 12-lines init might just spawn a shell
>
>Why would you even need a separate process to spawn the shell? /bin/bash is
>a perfectly capable init that can reap zombies, start processes, do any
>interactive tasks, or be automated (.bashrc, trap EXIT, etc).
...exactly, and that's why I remain convinced that writing a shell is
actually a far more instructive exercise than writing a 12-lines init
that calls rc to do all the work...
>
>Specifying init=/bin/bash via grub on the cmdline is a common rescue
>technique for systems with a broken init. Guess what init implementation
>needs to be rescued this way most often...
>
That's too harsh of you, Adam :D
HND
KatolaZ
*Joey Hess* was good developing in perl...
He disappeared from debian. Little is known about him.
Aitor.
_______________________________________________
Dng mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
