Hi, System initialisation is NO religiously enshrined mystery that is highly claimed to be beyond human comprehension. I can understand the position help by anyone that an init is so central to an OS that it must be coded scrupulously. And, given time, I think, I will eventually come back with something that can be said to be a functional and stable init.
My current task if of trapping system wide events like requests for shutdown and reboot. My init will be used to call various scripts or executables depending on the type of event. Edward On 18/06/2016, Rainer Weikusat <rweiku...@talktalk.net> wrote: > Lars Noodén <lars.noo...@gmail.com> writes: >> On 06/17/2016 09:36 PM, KatolaZ wrote: >> [snip] >>> Unfortunately, system initialisation is really a bit more complicated >>> than that, whether you like it or not. >> [snip] >> >> Is there a concise summary somewhere of what system initialization >> entails? Or is it dependent on accumulated experience and not codified? > > This depends heavily on what the system is supposed to do. Eg, something > fairly specialized running a single application could just run the > application as sole process instead of init. For something more general, > there'll be a static initialization step which will usually include > creating an initial filesystem namespace by mounting some set of > filesystems (some virtual, eg, proc and sys, others residing on real > devices) and my also include configuring some set of network > interfaces. Afterwards, a set of programs performing various functions > is started, eg, web server, name server, ssh server or so-called gettys > enabling interactive logins without going over a network. > _______________________________________________ > Dng mailing list > Dng@lists.dyne.org > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng > _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
