relaunchd: a portable clone of launchd

Fri Jan 15 10:36:33 UTC 2016

+1 :)

On 1/10/16 2:36 AM, Dan Partelly wrote:
> Copying the linux way of doing things should not be a goal of the BSDs. It is enough that unfortunately we are forced
> into Linuxisms  and associated wrappers to support  modern GPUs.  Understandable , given how few ppl work on BSDs,
> and how little code contributions do the BSDs receive from the massive enterprises they power (with
> some notable exceptions) Let me use this opportunity to thank Juniper for the glorified printf system
> they contributed to FreeBSD .
>
> Can the BSDs go forward with rc systems alone ? Sure they can , at least for the time beeing, and we will
> continue to use them. But innovation is desirable.
>
> Systemd might be a terrible implementation or not (I dont know, I dont use it)   but the ideas behind it are sane.
>
> rc systems are indeed robust, but they should be ancient history. They are nothing but glorified autoexec.bat systems.
> Modern OSes need sophisticated dynamic service management systems, fault management, transactional OS
>   configuration databases, centralised event systems supporting kernel sources.
>
>
> This is the problem domain things like sytemd and dbus are tring to solve. They might doit the wrong way, I personally think
> the direction Solaris took to solve some of those problems is the way to go, but at least they are trying to do something, and
> they clearly explored the problem space.
>
>
> Meanwhile here, some engineers are trying to change the FreeBSD OS configuration to a new DSL, but without any consideration for
> issues of centralising OS databases and add innovation like transactions and full concurrency safety.
>
> YOu gotta ask yourself, since it is only a language change, why even doit ????? It adds no technical innovations, the new
> systems are  not well enough thought  out to support technical innovation added incrementally later. So why are they doing it ?
> To change the DSL only ? By now all BSDs user are familiar with all adhoc databases  the OS offer. We are familiar (experts, even) with
> the language they use.  Changing this language , when no technical innovation is present, is , in my opinion, ill-advised.
>
> It is change for the sake of change, it is change because “someone wrote the code”, not because it solves any real problem , or is a well
>   thought out engineering solution.  I really hope someone from the developers wakes up and vetoes those changes for the sake of change,
> like Junipers libxo, and attemtps to change the DSLs for the sake of changing the DSL.
>
>
>
>> On 08 Jan 2016, at 17:20, Peter Beckman <beckman at angryox.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 7 Jan 2016, Dmitry Sivachenko wrote:
>>
>>>> On 07 Jan 2016, at 05:12, Mark Heily <mark at heily.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 8:42 AM, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard
>>>> <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups at ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>>>> I recommend, to anyone going down this route, looking towards finishing
>>>>> systembsd, especially instead of inventing a wholly new suite of protocols.
>>>>>
>>>>> * https://uglyman.kremlin.cc/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?p=systembsd.git
>>>>> *
>>>>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/debian-systemd-packaging-hoo-hah.html
>>>>> * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10176275
>>>>>
>>>>> The reason is that finishing systemdbsd will make happy all of the people
>>>>> who want the desktop environments whose design is driven largely by Linux to
>>>>> work on FreeBSD/PC-BSD.  The desktop environments that they'd like to use
>>>>> have been or are being modified to work with these daemons, over this D-Bus
>>>>> protocol.
>>>>>
>>>> I strongly disagree with your recommendation to adopt DBus and systemd
>>>> as core components of FreeBSD.
>>>>
>>>>  From a practical perspective, the proposal has a low probability of
>>>> success. Systemd is written for Linux and is largely driven by a
>>>> commercial Linux vendor. It is a rapidly moving target, with no sense
>>>> of scope or boundaries. It eagerly consumes the latest and greatest
>>>> innovations in the Linux kernel, with open disdain for portability.
>>>>
>>>>  From a philosophical perspective, I don't agree with the direction
>>>> that systemd is taking Linux. It's one of the reasons I switched to
>>>> BSD after many years in the Linux camp. To quote Spock, "Logic clearly
>>>> dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few". In
>>>> case of FreeBSD, this means that the needs of the desktop users should
>>>> not outweigh the needs of the server/jail/embedded/appliance users. My
>>>> concern with systemd and DBus is that these tools are highly
>>>> desktop-centric, and introduce a large degree of unwanted change,
>>>> complexity, and risk to everyone else.
>>>
>>> I totally agree.
>>>
>>> systemd is an ugly beast, solving simple problem in complex way.
>>>
>>> After using FreeBSD's rc system for years, I think that switching to something systemd-related would be huge mistake.
>>> No reason to clone everything that happens in Linux world.
>> Utterly and strongly agreed.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Peter Beckman                                                  Internet Guy
>> beckman at angryox.com <mailto:beckman at angryox.com>                                 http://www.angryox.com/ <http://www.angryox.com/>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> freebsd-hackers at freebsd.org <mailto:freebsd-hackers at freebsd.org> mailing list
>> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe at freebsd.org <mailto:freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe at freebsd.org>"
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-hackers at freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"