Boston Linux & UNIX was originally founded in 1994 as part of The Boston Computer Society. We meet on the third Wednesday of each month at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, in Building E51.

BLU Discuss list archive

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

[Discuss] SysVinit vs. systemd

If anyone hasn't had enough of SystemD debate ...

G+ has

a SysVinit - SystemD command crib sheet

a full debate and index to blogs elsewhere on topic

On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 9:28 AM, Edward Ned Harvey (blu)
<blu at> wrote:
>> From: at [mailto:discuss-
>> at] On Behalf Of Mike Small
>> "systemd handles a lot of annoying infrastructure for you; for example,
>> you do not have to arrange to daemonize programs you run."
>> I don't understand this at all. Aren't daemons written as daemons
>> (giving up controlling terminal and whatever else within their own
>> code).
> Traditional daemons are, because the programmers *had* *no* *other* *choice.*  Besides the complexity of actually daemonizing and figuring out how to hook up to a logging facility and manipulate the probably nonstandard running environment, the developer needs to debug their app, so they *also* make it able to run in console mode, and figure out how to manage running in both modes, in both environments.
> But if you want to create something new, the ability to daemonize any-random-command is a really nice convenience factor; you just write any simple console application or shell script, and it behaves exactly the same on your command terminal as it does when you make it a service under systemd.
>> "because it actively tracks unit status, conditional restarts are not
>> dangerous; it shares this behavior with any competently implemented
>> active init system."
>> Don't understand this. What's a conditional restart and why is it
>> dangerous? What's the difference between an active and passive init
>> system?
> A passive system is like /etc/init.d scripts, which brainlessly do as they're told when they're told, and don't make any decisions.  If something like mysqld dies, it will not automatically come back up.  An active system will notice mysqld died, recognize that it's not supposed to do that right now, and restart it.  I know SMF will try to restart a failed service some configurable threshold number of times in a configurable threshold period of time, and if the service continually fails, then the service gets disabled.  I assume something similar exists for systemd.
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at

Bill Ricker
bill.n1vux at

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 /