El 11/08/14 a las #4, David Haller escribió:
Guess why "systemd-shim" is called as it is? As a "pretend" systemd, to fool all the stuff requiring systemd. That's how far it has already crept into the infrastructure (and upstreams).
systemd-shim is an horrendous hack, fortunately only intended as a transition measure, originally from upstart.
The difference is: until now, no init precluded another. And especially, no init gobbled up tons of other critical functions like logging, udev, dbus etc.
Yes, until before systemd, a number of system components operated with very limited understanding of each other..now things are starting to make sense. and will get even more integrated in the near future.
And as far as I know LP's work, he's far from done yet. Oh, and BTW:
==== 9. systemd is designed with glibc in mind, and doesn't take kindly to supporting other libcs all that much[10]. In general, the systemd developers' idea of a standard libc is one that has bug-for-bug compatibility with glibc. ====
THAT's a huge honking blaring big major NO-NO for all that want to run Linux on embedded stuff using µlibc, dietlibc, ...
Yes, this is because only one thing is supported, one kernel, one libc, one you name it. it is called making precise, limited, realistic design decisions to fullfil a role in a particular market in order for stuff to be actually supportable and avoid drowning in compatibility hacks. I cannot overstate how much I support this and is an idea that should be widely imitated. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org