[arch-general] Re: My end-user $0.02 on /etc/rc.conf splitting.
nsebrecht at piing.fr
Wed Jul 25 04:44:34 EDT 2012
The 25/07/12, Heiko Baums wrote:
> In Linux I have/had some simple text files with which I can/could
> configure the whole system, while I had a terrible, cryptic registry on
I can find anything in systemd which could make think of the registry on
> In Linux I just can/could add a daemon to rc.conf to have it
> run. From what I read so far about systemd in all those discussions, in
> systemd I have to run a special command to have a daemon started at
> boot time (which I additionally have to remember), I have to write such
> an ini file instead of just writing or editing a simple and small
> config file or shell script
You are mixing up two things:
- adding/removing services on boot;
- configuring the services.
The first - adding/removing services - changes with systemd. Yes, it is
done using a dedicated command (which comes naturally with
autocompletion, here with zsh at least). This is for services provided
by the distribution.
If a service is not provided:
- with SysVinit you have to write the whole script usually relying on
whatever library the distribution provides (which tend to be
- with systemd, you just write a configuration file.
For the second, whether you use systemd or SysVinit, configuring a
service is typically done by editing the configuration file dedicated to
this service. In systemd, the file is declared like this
which is by itself much easier to hack (rather than reading in a shell
script to find where and how such a file is used).
> then systemd creates some symlinks of
> files into another directory whose name is also totally cryptic, at
> least way to long. This is a total mess, if this is really true, and
> it's absolutely a step towards a second Windoze.
This is systemd internals. It's not expected from the user to play with
> But if there's such a long discussion and if there are so many
> complains about a software or a change, then you can assume that
> there's something going pretty wrong.
No, I won't assume something that the software is going wrong. I assume
the change raise fear, whether it is well-founded or not.
> I never ever have
> read such long discussions and so many complains about a software like
> about the software of Lennart Poettering (PulseAudio and systemd).
OTOH for the systemd case, we are changing of paradigm for the boot
process. I'm not aware of such a change in the boot process for years.
All recent event-based init systems have raise fear.
More information about the arch-general