Am Samstag, den 05.04.2014, 19:17 -0500 schrieb Bruce Dubbs:
> Armin K. wrote:
> > On 04/06/2014 01:19 AM, thomas wrote:
> >> Am Samstag, den 05.04.2014, 16:41 -0500 schrieb Bruce Dubbs:
> >>> Working with systemd, there seem to be lots of "learning" issues.
> >>>
> >>> I was trying to watch the boot sequence and the screen clears and I get
> >>> a login prompt. How to disable clearing the screen? Well that's simple
> >>> enough:
> >>>
> >>> mkdir -p /etc/systemd/system/getty@tty1.service.d
> >>>
> >>> cat > /etc/systemd/system/getty@tty1.service.d/noclear.conf < EOF
> >>> [service]
> >>> TTYVTDisallocate=no
> >>> EOF
> >>
> >> So you finally managed to start discovering all the real and fancy
> >> benefits of systemd. It has been really time now that a system comes up
> >> which forces the user to figure out how to deal with the login prompt
> >> again. Think about what else you could do in this time this new stuff
> >> prevents you from. Thanks the lord, otherwise you could even go meet
> >> friends and have a nice weekend. Ah, by default or not (i don't know),
> >> systemd ignores the /tmp mointpoint in fstab and handle it by itself
> >> somehow.
>
> That's not true for me. I have:
>
> /dev/sdb5 /tmp ext4 6%
>
The support guys now need to ask: Which init have you started? May be
fstab is not ignored on your system, now you have to figure out why.
Simplest case would be that there is no .mount file. Maybe in ArchLinux
the install such a .mount file by default...
That is what I call consistence, and it immediatly shows me the urge of
inventing .mount files. Changing fstab rebooting will from now on not
neccessarily show any effect.
> I don't know if systemd wipes it or not. It may and I'll need to figure
> out how to disable that. So there are two issues here.
See my comment about efforts below...
>
> (lots of blah blah of mine)
> >>
> >> I believe giving the user the option between systemd and sysvinit is
> >> brilliant and in times systemd seems to become more popular (for
> >> whatever reason) simply consequent and valid. But I really do not
> >> understand the point in having both in parallel on the machine. The
> >> option should apply to the build time.
>
> How better to compare and contrast then to use exactly the same system
> with the exception of the init program and /etc/init.d?
How often this will be done? And by whom? By trend I use computers -
even with LFS installed - for productive work (more or less). Sometimes
there is a bit more work on the system itself, lets say when a new
version of KDE comes up (which is true this year), but finally, the
system is there to be used and hardly to be booted in X vs. Y seconds.
Maybe that everyone else except me is interested in rebooting to
different init systems 24 hours a day, I'm not. I'm interested in a rock
solid foundation on which the next step (build BLFS packages) is to be
done.
Btw, how better to compare than watching two VMs starting. Each doing
its crystal clean own stuff. I assume that "who does the compare" is
answered by "mainly the LFS developers", right? They should be able to
script the build-process entirely, maybe with a parameter like
--init-system={sysvinit,systemd}. Than you can compare two identical
systems (except IP-address, init-system and probably hostname) even at
the same time.
I wished all the efforts would have been put in the theory and maybe
even practice of package management. A also interesting area to learn
something. There has been a perfect working SysV and also a well
maintained systemd version of the LFS book. They both are gone, a
mixture came up. Too bad about the two.
>
> > Yea, I'd prefer the same approach, but that would make it way harder for
> > BLFS. Ie, some packages in BLFS will be installed if building systemd,
> > others will not, and having two udevs will cause twice the trouble for
> > post-LFS part (2 udev sections, for gudev lib, etc).
>
> Actually, most of the BLFS differences seem to be in the boot scripts.
> Having 'make install-sshd' install to both systems is almost trivial.
Again, where is the benefit of poluting a system with stuff from the
boot system i do not use?
>
> I'm sure there will be other differences, but those are not as frequent.
Hopefully, but noone can trust.
>
> -- Bruce
--
Thomas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
