On Thu, 29 Sep 2016 12:43:49 -0700 Joseph Sinclair wrote: > : Begin Rant [snip] > SystemD should be restricted to it's INIT > functions, dump the horrible non-standard logging, drop all of the > service replacements (or spin them into separate services), and get > laser-focused on getting that INIT service bullet-proof, But if systemd were restricted to PID1 plus a process starter, what would differentiate it from very nice INITs like runit, s6, and Epoch? [snip] > I think the entire RedHat organization (and the professional > open-source community in general) might need a refresher course on > operating system design, particularly focusing on microkernel > architectures and the how/why those are inherently more secure (also > why the tradeoffs involved don't work as well in Ring-0 kernel space > as they do in Ring-3 user space). This would be counterproductive for Redhat. Please remember they make their money on consulting, certs and education: Three services that lose value as the underlying system becomes easier to use and comprehend. Read http://asay.blogspot.ru/2006/10/interview-with-red-hat-cto-brian.html and search for the first occurrence of the word "complexity" and you'll hear, straight from the horse's mouth, why they'll never make systemd a simple PID1 plus process runner. SteveT Steve Litt September 2016 featured book: Twenty Eight Tales of Troubleshooting http://www.troubleshooters.com/28 --------------------------------------------------- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss