Before 'systemD' how was it hostorically done to keep serivces/daemons kerenel running through failures

[Jose]

If SystemD is cross platform and BSD licensed, will FreeBSD adopt it?

It is highly unlikely this will ever happen

LinuxFr.org : Systemd use a lot of Linux only technologies (cgroups, udev, fanotify, timerfd, signalfd, etc). Do you really think the Linux API has been taking the role of the POSIX API and the other systems are irrelevant ?
Lennart : Yes, I don't think BSD is really too relevant anymore, and I think that this implied requirement for compatibility with those systems when somebody hacks software for the free desktop or ecosystem is a burden, and holds us back for little benefit.

Original version - LinuxFr.org

L’actualité du logiciel libre et des sujets voisins (DIY, Open Hardware, Open Data, les Communs, etc.), sur un site francophone contributif géré par une équipe bénévole par et pour des libristes enthousiastes

linuxfr.org

Lennart, ever the politician, has changed his tune now and like all abusers he blames the victim

Myth: systemd being Linux-only is not nice to the BSDs.
Completely wrong. The BSD folks are pretty much uninterested in systemd. If systemd was portable, this would change nothing, they still wouldn't adopt it.

The Biggest Myths

Posts and writings by Lennart Poettering

0pointer.de

 

[Jose]

I agree about SMF being a bad idea as well. But not at all on the rest. "Just restart" is recipe for desaster.

It's all fun and games until your code crashes so quickly that init refuses to restart it. Then you get to wade through layers upon layers of fossilized bugs and hacks. Not that it's happened to me. I heard it from a friend.