Boston Linux & Unix (BLU) Home | Calendar | Mail Lists | List Archives | Desktop SIG | Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings
Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Blog | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU

BLU Discuss list archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Red Hat's response to my system-config-samba rhel6 issue

On Dec 21, 2010, at 1:35 AM, Tom Metro wrote:
>> based on launchd concepts and has even expanded on
>> many of them.
> Ubuntu's Upstart is event-based as well. It is a core feature:

True enough, okay, Linux has event-based service startup... but... both seem to be stuck in the sysvinit world.  They're both replacements for init... and that's the philosophical anchor: they're seen and developed as init replacements rather than the "one daemon to rule them all" providing a unified service launch system.  That's where I think launchd and SMF are superior even when they are themselves flawed (SMF is cumbersome and launchd lacks Vixie cron's flexibility).  Both need to stop being drop-in replacements for init, and both need to seriously subsume all service startup responsibilities.  Until then they just make service startup more fragmented than what we've had for 30+ years.

Bonus points for unifying their configurations and making either a drop-in replacement for the other.

Apologies if that seems scatter-brained.  Score one for the anti-histamines.

--Rich P.

BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities.

Valid HTML 4.01! Valid CSS!

Boston Linux & Unix /