Linked by Eugenia Loli on Wed 1st Oct 2003 23:09 UTC
General Development OSNews was the first news magazine to break the story on Gnome's Seth Nickell effort to replace the Init system. Soon, it became confusing to many readers as to if Seth is planning to completely replace the Init system or simply "bridge" it. We had a chat with Seth and discussed about his plans on the project (which is a personal project so far) and for Storage, an exciting project which aims to replace the traditional filesystem with a new database-based document store.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: No, I don't hate new ideas
by Ken Jennings on Fri 3rd Oct 2003 18:03 UTC

Mostly Dittos.

If it is broke, then it is OK to fix it. But is the way init works broken?

The different runlevels exist, because linux is not the OS of a single-user, single-tasking, unnetworked platform from where Windows draws its roots. Good system administration sometimes NEEDS no gui, or no network services, or no user other than root logging in.

The fact that linux is being used on the desktop has more to do with the fact that linux is lightweight and can run on the desktop, even though it can also supply the services used by major enterprise servers.

If the problem is really that Red Hat and Suse (and others) use different scripting methods to stop/start/restart services, then maybe the real crusade is to convince the distro builders to agree to something more unified.

I'm worried about this becoming bloaty-ware. My take on it is that services would be required to support some start/stop config GUI interface. This is overhead that a currently tiny daemon would not have to manage? Doesn't sound better/faster to me.

Once I got my laptop configured I turned off the things that were non-essential and bootup time became dramatically faster -- this is the "fix" most desktop users need to do; just know how to turn services off.