On 10/17/18 9:58 AM, KatolaZ wrote:
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 09:30:50AM -0500, Daniel Taylor wrote:
[cut]
c) where and how would you draw the line indicating what's unacceptable about
systemd - in other words, what exactly do you mean by "the Unix paradigm" in
your comment above?
Split out the PID 1 stuff to just the bare minimum of what needs to be
there, organize everything else into appropriate units.
This is not a trivial project, which is why nobody has taken it on AFAIK,
but systemd must be doing something that package maintainers and developers
want. That suggests that the way to beat them is to do that, only better.
The problem is exactly there: you don't really need systemd if you
just need a reliable PID 1. What appeals systemd's enthusiasts is the
process supervision and management system. Which is probably 90% of
the reason why systemd needed to fagocitate the whole low-level
user-space (please remember that the only way to reliably know that a
process is dead under unix is to be the parent of that process....).
You can be the parent process of a userspace without being PID 1.
That's the beauty of it.
I know the issue looks easy and straightforward on the surface. But
when you start looking into it seriously, you quickly realise that
things are not as straightforward as you thought ;)
The problem description is very straightforward.
I don't know how hard implementing it will be.
I guess as the person who suggested it, it's my responsibility to at
least scope it out properly.
Me and my big mouth.
--
Daniel Taylor
_______________________________________________
Dng mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
