Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

dindusmith · 2024-10-01 11:52:50

sysvinit conforms to the Unix philosophy, small is beautiful, do one thing to be the best. On my configured system, it starts and shuts down faster than Debian. However, sysvinit lacks many useful functions of systemd, such as sensitive hot-swapping function, detailed monitoring function of services, etc. If these insufficient functions can be added, then it will be really perfect, instead of reinventing the wheel like systemd. Here is my startup cache:

why-has-no-one-enhanced-sysvinit-v0-c2g5sra7d4sd1.png?width=1440&format=png&auto=webp&s=fb683224daedd49b3ae2b0ab35433f562198fde0

Camtaf · 2024-10-01 13:51:49

Because it does what it was programmed to do...

golinux · 2024-10-01 14:35:40

Because less is more . . .

Altoid · 2024-10-01 15:24:42

Hello:

dindusmith wrote:

sysvinit conforms to the Unix philosophy, small is beautiful, do one thing to be the best.

Exactly ...
Seems to me that you knew the answer before posting the question. ;^ )

Camtaf wrote:

... does what it was programmed to do...

golinux wrote:

... less is more . . .

+1

Best,

A.

EDX-0 · 2024-10-02 13:36:39

well, sysvinit is unix philosophy compliant, you know that that means?

we do not need to make those other features a necessary part of sysvinit, just implement programs that can perform them and then can interact with sysvinit, for example for hot-swapping/hot-plugging hardware there is a daemon that can manage devices and apply rules, properties and run other programs in response to device plugging, it is called the udev daemon, in devuan it is provided by eudev.

now for service monitoring i know some use daemontools and i remember reading o someone that rolled out a daemon to monitor the running services.

stopAI · 2024-10-02 14:57:40

Hello.

I agree with everyone who has said in previous posts.

Sysvinit is a great example of unix philosophy. And if a person is not satisfied with this, he always has the option of using the malware-systemd.

zapper · 2024-10-02 19:32:20

@all Or you could just use openrc which is way more functional then sysvinit but isn't that bloated monolith systemd.

rolfie · 2024-10-02 19:48:16

View of a simple user: sysvinit is just functional, I have moved back from openrc to sysvinit.

zapper · 2024-10-02 20:35:17

@rolfie my point was that, its not just systemd or sysvinit... there are other options.

rolfie · 2024-10-02 21:13:28

I do not see any advantage from using openrc, runit, s6 ... whatever. They promise a lot, but I do not get their benefits.

golinux · 2024-10-02 21:21:13

Bragging rights perhaps?

blackhole · 2024-10-02 22:05:48

Unless you're administering a server, service supervision, or lack of, isn't really a factor. So it's not really a con that sysvinit lacks this. If you are a sysadmin, service supervision might make your life easier, as part of your job role may be to keep flakey crap up and running.

We had a lot of this around 10 years ago:

"sysvinit lacks service supervision"
"you must be a server sysadmin (as per above)"
"no I'm just some random opinionated fanboi twat who read lots of Poettering's blogs - in 10 years from now I will be sneering at those who are reluctant to move to Wayland".

My FreeBSD servers run what they need to run using BSD init. systemd units have been less reliable and less untuitive and more difficult to manage.

This "migrate and upgrade" bollocks comes from the proprietary mindset, where every migration and upgrade is profit for Big Tech corporations.

Last edited by blackhole (2024-10-02 22:06:57)

Altoid · 2024-10-02 22:58:10

Hello:

golinux wrote:

Bragging rights perhaps?

Hmmm ... Sharp.
You may have a something there.

From when all init software thing came into my field of view a few years ago, (as a workstation/desktop/laptop user) I could really not understand the benefits of whatever other choice I had besides the default sysvinit software I had running in my system.

I mean ...
WTF4?

ie: to what advantage? <- key question for anyone with a workstation / desktop / laptop / netbook / RPi / etc.

What I did realise right away (10+ years of MS registry maintenance under my belt) was what a radical change / departure from what Linux is the advent of systemd brought along, so I looked for something else and found Devuan Jesse.

Thanks for that.

Best,

A.

stopAI · 2024-10-03 12:11:51

I have moved back from openrc

Hello.

I would like to ask, what is the reason for this? Why did you come back to sysvinit territory?

rolfie · 2024-10-03 17:21:27

@stopAI: Don't expect any further insight, I am a simple user running a small home network with some PCs here.

I am with Devuan since ASCII was Testing and I discovered that ASCII supported my method of encryption/automatic decryption during bootup I used to use with my Debian installations before systemd. For some reason I started with openRC.

My experience that openRC did not care for non-critical but irritating error messages, understanding that openRC is more or less just an add-on to sysvinit, reading some of the forum entries and comments from fsmithred and ralphronnquist pointing to sysvinit as the primary init system made me try this on all my installations I have done from last year onward, and I miss nothing.

stopAI · 2024-10-04 11:57:35

rolfie

Thank you for the answer.

GNUser · 2024-10-04 15:50:00

SysVinit has been enhanced multiple times, most notably by the addition of the insserv and startpar scripts, which serve to organize the boot sequence and start services in parallel, respectively. These scripts lead to a dramatic improvement in boot time. I've heard people refer to sysvinit + insserv + startpar as "augmented SysVinit." Devuan uses augmented SysVinit.

SysVinit was being used in UNIX in the late 1980s. I'm not sure when the augmentation happened: Based on the years written inside the source files, it may have been 2004. Judging from earliest git commit, it may have been 2012. If someone knows the history better, please jump in with the correct year when insserv and startpar were born. I can safely say it was sometime in the 21st Century My point is that the addition of these scripts was a major enhancement.

A new chapter in SysVinit's history began when Jesse Smith (DistroWatch administrator) took over its maintenance in 2022. There have been several new releases of SysVinit since then, including two releases this year. With each release there are additional enhancements (e.g., minor bug fixes).

Last edited by GNUser (2024-10-05 02:33:34)

Ron · 2024-10-05 02:04:32

GNUser wrote:

A new chapter in SysVinit's history began when Jesse Smith (DistroWatch administrator) took over its maintenance in 2022. There have been several new releases of SysVinit since then, including two releases this year. With each release there are additional enhancements (e.g., minor bug fixes).

I never knew this. I was under the assumption that there had been no new development on sysvinit in years.

zapper · 2024-10-05 05:09:26

openrc in my experience, its easier to start and stop processes. For example, sysvinit, I have no idea what you need to do to make that happen in pure sysvinit.

That was my reason for supporting that ideal. But you do you.

GNUser · 2024-10-05 11:06:17

I was neither endorsing SysVinit nor saying there aren't better init systems. I was just answering the OP's question, which is misleading.

Last edited by GNUser (2024-10-05 11:47:54)

zapper · 2024-10-13 10:33:28

@GNUser That is fair,. Btw, to be honest, the only init that is probably as light as sysvinit but still very featured like openrc is runit.

I still have to learn a bit more on how to use it though.

The officially official Devuan Forum!

#1 2024-10-01 11:52:50

Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

#2 2024-10-01 13:51:49

Re: Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

#3 2024-10-01 14:35:40

Re: Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

#4 2024-10-01 15:24:42

Re: Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

#5 2024-10-02 13:36:39

Re: Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

#6 2024-10-02 14:57:40

Re: Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

#7 2024-10-02 19:32:20

Re: Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

#8 2024-10-02 19:48:16

Re: Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

#9 2024-10-02 20:35:17

Re: Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

#10 2024-10-02 21:13:28

Re: Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

#11 2024-10-02 21:21:13

Re: Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

#12 2024-10-02 22:05:48

Re: Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

#13 2024-10-02 22:58:10

Re: Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

#14 2024-10-03 12:11:51

Re: Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

#15 2024-10-03 17:21:27

Re: Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

#16 2024-10-04 11:57:35

Re: Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

#17 2024-10-04 15:50:00

Re: Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

#18 2024-10-05 02:04:32

Re: Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

#19 2024-10-05 05:09:26

Re: Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

#20 2024-10-05 11:06:17

Re: Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

#21 2024-10-13 10:33:28

Re: Why has no one enhanced sysvinit?

Board footer