On Wed, February 21, 2018 21:52, DJ Lucas wrote:
> On 02/21/2018 10:07 PM, A. Wan wrote:
>> Is there even one other compelling reason for using systemd?
> Many. To name a few, simple replacements for logging (journal),
> (timers), sntp, dhcp, resolver, on-demand daemons, etc. Simplified
> management of services, auto dependency resolution for services,
> services/sockets (analogous to init scripts and socket activation
> scripts for inetd) provided by upstream. New kernel features require
> for some software, specifically cgroups and logind --Read: Gnome
> I hear it's now working fairly easily with elogind cut out of
I apologize for implying there isn't any advantage with systemd
other than speed.
>> By the way I haven't been able to get systemd to work
because I cannot
>> build a boot device that used systemd from a system that is not
>> systemd, because systemd's configuration programs will edit
>> running operating system.
> Not sure what you are referring to. I'll guess it has to do with
> the *ctl programs? Yes these are intended for a running system. If
>> I know there is some kind of special "chroot"
>> (because normal "chroot" won't work), which of
course, also requires the
>> running operating to be running systemd.
> The init system should have no bearing on your chroot environment,
> suspect that has to do with the first problem above. Not sure what
It was a few months ago when I tried. I don't remember
exactly what went wrong but probably the *ctl programs were the ones that
didn't work. The "special chroot" method was for
allowing some systemd programs to run with an systemd not running with PID
What I really need is a generic boot device that can
diagnose/fix/restore/backup etc. another installation. Since
there is a new LFS coming soon I should try again (the systemd version)
first and post findings. It may take some time because I have
trouble with building the kernel right now.
I apologize again for my uninformed post.
Unsubscribe: See the above information page