On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 12:29:20 +0200 Håkon Alstadheim <ha...@alstadheim.priv.no> wrote:
> Apparently Joel has (valid! ) other commitments. There are people > willing and able to work on systemd. Unless someone else steps up > with code or an online class in linux IPC, I'd say the case can be > closed. Huh? The whole point is that they should have *stopped* working on it when they got a good PID 1. Instead they continued work on it in order to subsume half the operating system. Systemd needs less work, not more, unless you count getting rid of the glommed on cruft as work. > That "online class in linux IPC" would not only need to teach code > that works, it would need to capture mind-share to such an extent > that most people would say "that is the linux way". The principle of encapsulation says that IPC should be limited to a "need to know" basis. In other words, if App A screws up, you don't want to be looking in apps B, C, D and E to see if any of them issued a bad message that somehow got misprocessed by app A. Having lots of apps reading and writing dbus is a recipe for hard to trace bugs. > The situation to > day, with e.g. the /etc/postfix/master.cf as "state of the art", SMTP servers are notoriously complex, that's the nature of the beast. I believe qmail gets away from .cf files, but it's still pretty complicated. > while competing with grafted-on-crutches such as daemontools :-) Nice characterization. Please allow me to rephrase.. while competing with clean and simple but relatively unknown software such as daemontools I *really* wish I'd evangelized daemontools on this list before the majority of the systemd conversation occurred. Daemontools is much, much more than a substitute for any init. SteveT Steve Litt * http://www.troubleshooters.com/ Troubleshooting Training * Human Performance -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140923104324.7108b...@mydesq2.domain.cxm
