On Sat, May 25, 2013 21:55, Tom Wijsman wrote: > On Sat, 25 May 2013 21:09:47 +0200 > "J. Roeleveld" <jo...@antarean.org> wrote: > >> How will the stop/start part of services/init-scripts/... be done? > > Not sure what you mean here; if you keep init function the same as the > init you boot with, this should continue to work.
As an example. Lets say I want to test a new init-system. To do this, I follow the (still to be written) guide on "eselect init" and boot into new-and-shiny-init-system. I am still used to stopping/starting services using "/etc/init.d/<service> start/stop" And using the "rc" command to add/remove services from the runlevel(s). If I then, accidentally, type "/etc/init.d/xyz start" when "xyz" hasn't been started by any means yet. What will happen? I would assume that openrc will try to start "xyz"? This is, I believe, something that could cause issues as dependencies might also try to start and I then have a service running not managed by the "new-and-shiny-init-system" that I was testing. >> I am assuming that should be for the user to keep in mind, but will >> it be possible to add something that will make init.d-scripts not >> work when systemd is running and unit-files not work when systemd is >> not running? > > They currently just bail out with bogus errors as far as I am aware. > > # /etc/init.d/ntpd start > ntpd | * WARNING: ntpd is already starting > # /etc/init.d/ntpd stop > ntpd | * ERROR: ntpd stopped by something else See above, what about if "ntpd" wasn't running yet? >> >> hooks on reboot are still needed for more complex ones. >> > >> > Which complex cases would these hooks be needed on? >> >> I think one of these would be the stopping/starting of services (see >> above) > > No, if you keep the init system the same as the one you boot with there > should be no problems. See above, what about trying to start services using the method of the not-running init? >> [[ Below is my ONLY remark on that, please feel free to mentally >> paste it as a response any email trying to explain why it's important >> to reduce the boottime ]] > > My intention was not to advocate optimizing boot times; I know, that bit was meant generic, not just as a reply to you. > as a kernel > maintainer / developer I need to test new releases, run git bisects, do > Nouveau reclocking work. I really need this, the average person that > keeps his PC running, not so much; I care for it because I can't wait 2 > minutes, not because I think it's shiny to have such a short boot... > > PS: I'm also a mobile laptop user that no longer has a battery. :/ I believe you can still use hibernate there? :) -- Joost
