> > That's not entirely true. Many years ago I wrote an implementation of > runlevel/init.d/SYS V init applets for busybox, aiming for LSB > compliance. It included the ability for the actual "scripts" > themselves to be written in any language, and included several ones > written in C as busybox applets. These init "scripts" would just be > symlinks to busybox. This is in fact compliant with the LSB > specification. > > If I remember correctly, it includes most of the good stuff systemd > claims, fast boot if all/most of the "scripts" are written in C, > dependency tracking, parallel "script" running, etc. >
thats pretty cool. Since i started on this project i have started to adapt a certain mentality of reusing whats on the system and trying to minimize redundant code. During my self education today i read that the kernel is supposed to call /sbin/init and recalling a snippet of LFS you can write a script to replace init (to some degree or another). So i have been digging for resources to do just that. My concern becomes "reaping" child processes as i have heard here/musl-list several times and respawning of services etc. Im not sure how much of this can be done in a script yet but Im still digging through websites and such. I confess ive been a bit scatterbrained today looking at a init script, systemd, sysv init, rcS script, etc. what i do know is i need to thread everything i can as much as i can for speed. I remember something about setting up init run levels a certain way to do this but haven't refound that article yet. In general i want to always keep as much of the system broken apart so it can be threaded as possible to increase speed on todays multi thread-core systems. I have a lot more reading to do before i will get there.
_______________________________________________ Toybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net
