|
|
|
|
|
by Nullabillity
897 days ago
|
|
> Prior init's were actually quite easy to replace and alternatives were often used, but these days most software assumes systemd and this situation gets worse every year. Not really. Sysvinit scripts are... scripts full of sysvinitisms (double forking and PID files, anyone?). Idiomatic systemd daemons are, comparatively speaking, very straightforward. Of course, there are a lot of nice-to-have features, but to get a running system, you should largely be able to get away with parsing Wants=, After=, and ExecStart=. |
|
... well, a bunch of scripts are something that's relatively easy to replace. It's not as though other system components have reliance of these scripts and their sysvinit'isms baked in.
From what I've heard (though not verified) - non-systemd distributions seem to manage to work with upstart, or openrc, instead of sysvinit, without much hassle.