From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 15 12:54:36 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D47471065675; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 12:54:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from atte.peltomaki@iki.fi) Received: from kameli.org (kameli.org [83.150.86.93]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F6548FC21; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 12:54:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kameli.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 9047911F81E; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 15:48:49 +0300 (EEST) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 15:48:49 +0300 From: Atte =?iso-8859-1?Q?Peltom=E4ki?= To: Richard Yao Message-ID: <20120615124849.GI96212@ass.kameli.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 13:41:11 +0000 Cc: "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" , openrc@gentoo.org, Nathan Whitehorn Subject: Replacing rc(8) (Was: FreeBSD Boot Times) X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 12:54:36 -0000 On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 02:09:38PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote: > Also, I am certain that the OpenRC developers would be thrilled if > FreeBSD adopted OpenRC. If FreeBSD core is interested in OpenRC, feel > free to contact the OpenRC and/or the Gentoo FreeBSD developers. We > would all love to see OpenRC in upstream FreeBSD. Replacing rc(8) has a lot of risks and not many benefits. Current system is somewhat limited, but it works, it's simple to understand and everyone already knows it and uses it. Solaris SMF is by far the most advanced bootup/service manager I've come across, even though it's UI is somewhat irritating. When configured correctly, you can trust SMF to deal with any problem; when a needed resource for a given service is down, that service isn't started. When the service is malfunctioning, it's restarted at a configured interval or marked as malfunctioning and stopped and admin is contacted. And so forth. Faster boot times come as a simple added bonus from proper design. Anyone serious about replacing rc(8) should take a good look at SMF feature list, then decide if such a thing is worth spending time reimplementing. Doing a dozen half-assed implementations like Linux is doing is just dumb and aggravates sysadmins. Personally, as much as I like power of SMF, I think FreeBSD devs have much more important (and interesting) things to do. -- Atte Peltomäki atte.peltomaki@iki.fi <> http://kameli.org "Your effort to remain what you are is what limits you"