Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 10:02:07 +1100 From: Outback Dingo <outbackdingo@gmail.com> To: Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups@ntlworld.com> Cc: "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: nosh version 1.9 Message-ID: <CAKYr3zwg=C3E%2BXsn-ETH24v=XNDwaZiq4krOdrhWdVzeVoARhQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAKYr3zyGJFg9avUm0Ki9TxSi3uCTx-19TOYdsjUohRXZQv_E7A@mail.gmail.com> References: <54430B41.3010301@NTLWorld.com> <5443191E.5050208@mu.org> <CAJ-VmomhxAkmVpAv5M%2Bh2HiEGnzHuXoZRh=E3LEvcRqbkoJ-5Q@mail.gmail.com> <34F30D28-DE9B-444F-885E-F438FEEA46EC@mu.org> <CAKYr3zwFyOh0VuQew5XtzKCNe0sDe2qc_5Jg3g9hT8pE7SyhJA@mail.gmail.com> <54482A5E.2050303@NTLWorld.com> <CAKYr3zyGJFg9avUm0Ki9TxSi3uCTx-19TOYdsjUohRXZQv_E7A@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Outback Dingo <outbackdingo@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard < > J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups@ntlworld.com> wrote: > >> Outback Dingo: >> >>> >>> IMHO I think we'd be better off with launchd... but this does show >>> intelligence.... >>> >>> >> A while ago, I lived in a comfortable little world. Yes, everyone else >> was getting the likes of Solaris SMF, AIX SRC, systemd, upstart, and >> whatnot. But BSD was alright. Someone was bound to come along and package >> up launchd. After all, MacOS is BSD ... right? >> >> Then I did some investigation. >> >> There have been, to my knowledge, three attempts (in 2005, 2008, and >> 2013) to give launchd to the general BSD world that have involved more than >> just talk. All have foundered. The discomforting truth is that we aren't >> going to get launchd for doing service and system management for the very >> same reasons that we aren't going to get systemd for doing service and >> system management. systemd is full of Linuxisms. launchd is full of >> Machisms. It's simply not a BSD program. It's a Mach program. (The fact >> that the initial process program isn't portable is obvious in hindsight. I >> kicked myself. I've written several initial process programs before. They >> aren't, and cannot be, limited to non-operating-system-specific stuff.) >> One attempt to port launchd involved stubbing out the Machisms. There has >> been a recent attempt to port systemd to FreeBSD that is in the same boat: >> stub out or remove all of the operating system specific parts, and one can >> get a program that will compile (with a lot of compiler warnings); but it >> doesn't function. >> >> The launchd train is never coming. It's this realization, in addition to >> several other motivating factors, that spurred me to aim high with nosh, >> and actually set that task of converting those rc.d scripts. Feel free to >> thank the valiant and noble failures of the launchd porters for the fact >> that there's one alternative to BSD init that doesn't put an XML parser >> into the program for process #1. (-: >> >> > Actually thats not true..... We did successfully port it, and it is not > released on github..... and it does work. > > https://github.com/outbackdingo/launchd_xml > And to further note, we have even used openrc successfully on FreeBSD, As it all boils down I think to users preferences I believe having a choice is good..... now there appear to be three alternatives in the mix...... > > > >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org >> " >> > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAKYr3zwg=C3E%2BXsn-ETH24v=XNDwaZiq4krOdrhWdVzeVoARhQ>