Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (1578 mails)

[Stefan Seyfried <stefan.seyfried@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Anders,

On 14.11.2011 13:06, Anders Johansson wrote:

> On Monday 14 November 2011 08:59:48 Stefan Seyfried wrote:
> > (will be interesting if this mail gets past the censor)

> > puts each service into its own cgroup
>
> Hardly necessary to rewrite the entire core infrastructure to achieve


Well, you can of course rewrite sysv init to do that. Unfortunately,
nobody did.
Or fix each and every init script. Unfortunately, nobody did.

systemd is giving me that for free.


> > => reliable stopping of services
>
> heh. No (see the start of this thread, the cause being that systemd was 
> unable 
> to stop gdm).


I'm pretty sure that systemd would be able to stop it, but due to some
bug it did not even try to.
A bug. Exists in software.

> Also, what do you imagine systemd is? It is not a kernel service. It has to 
> work with kill or killproc just like any other tool.


No, it doesn't need killproc, see below. That's maybe one of its biggest
advantages.

> If sysvinit fails, so 
> will systemd - or reversed, if the systemd scripts manage to stop a service,


Imagine an apache server. A malicious CGI. Double forking. Reparented to
init. How do you find out you need to stop the CGI when stopping apache?

With systemd it's easy: everything that's in apaches cgroup gets killed.

That's not a feature of systemd. To put every service into its own
cgroup is a feature of systemd, which just as a side effect brings the

> then the sysvinit can use the exact same technique to stop it. Again, no need 
> to rewrite the entire infrastructure.


Of course. Just implement proper cgroups support in sysv init.
Nobody did.

My customers will like systemd alone for those reasons. Better get
accustomed to the thought now :-)
-- 
Stefan Seyfried

"Dispatch war rocket Ajax to bring back his body!"
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx