On Jun 12, 2015, at 12:18 46, Wayne Merricks <[email protected]> 
wrote:

> Systemd apparently has similar ways of achieving the same thing and it seems 
> to be the way everything is going now so I should probably get to grips with 
> it.

The basic idea of the two is similar: services are configured to respond (e.g. 
by starting or stopping)  to ‘events’ and are capable of emitting ‘events’ 
(e.g. ‘service is ready’) of their own to which other services can respond, as 
opposed to the traditional concept of ‘runlevels’ to which groups of services 
belong.  The approach does yield much faster boot times, but at the cost of 
vastly increased complexity in the writing and debugging of the init scripts.  
The approach perhaps has some merit for devices that are frequently started and 
stopped, such as cell phones (although my iPhone 6+ actually takes longer to 
boot than CentOS 6), but for ‘server’ type systems like Rivendell that get 
rebooted about once a year on average, the added complexity doesn’t buy you 
anything useful.

Cheers!


|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Frederick F. Gleason, Jr. |              Chief Developer             |
|                           |              Paravel Systems             |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|          A room without books is like a body without a soul.         |
|                                         -- Cicero                    |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|

_______________________________________________
Rivendell-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://caspian.paravelsystems.com/mailman/listinfo/rivendell-dev

Reply via email to