Your thoughts about init system

boombim

New Member

Reaction score: 3
Messages: 11

Hello. What do you think about current initialisation system in freebsd? Should it be changed or it's decent?
How about modern faster init system as runit or whatever?
 

kpedersen

Son of Beastie

Reaction score: 1,673
Messages: 2,507

How about modern faster init system as runit or whatever?
Can you explain the use of the word modern? Is it written using a modern language? It doesn't look like any of the ideas presented by it are particularly recent. In any case, of course we have it in ports for you to use.

https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/sysutils/runit/
https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/sysutils/runit-faster/

Why do you need faster? How often do you boot?! Possibly your use-case is not well aligned to FreeBSD.

Also, perhaps look around too, there are FreeBSD based projects like GhostBSD that use alternatives i.e OpenRC (https://wiki.ghostbsd.org/index.php/OpenRC).
 

ct85711

Member

Reaction score: 31
Messages: 50

From what I have seen, the current init for FreeBsd does what it should be doing and doesn't have any significant issues. From this view, there isn't a need to change something that is working properly for an unknown system. Even when I was on Gentoo, runit was proposed, and yet it was even asked there why change something that's been working for several years for a new program that hasn't even been around all that long. The other part to keep in mind, the init isn't something you should change without a very serious thought and numerous testing; as it is one of the key processes. So it isn't something like some graphics or office program that you change out when ever you feel like it without any issues.
 

hruodr

Aspiring Daemon

Reaction score: 205
Messages: 772

Why always these questions?! Sure there is a lot of things to improve, but why always the same targets,
parts of the system that work and always worked since they are in (Free)BSD?
 

Crivens

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator

Reaction score: 1,514
Messages: 2,429

Oh, and I will leave this little thing here for when the argumemts to adapt you-know-what crop up.
We had that ad-nauseam.
*puts Stormbreaker next to the thread*
 
D

Deleted member 66267

Guest


Perhaps all of these guys need something like SystemBSD, BSD licensed clone of SystemD so they don't have to learn the new thing when switching from Linux to FreeBSD. They only want to carry their culture on with them but don't want to learn to do the native platform's ways.
 

Trihexagonal

Daemon

Reaction score: 1,698
Messages: 2,270

Works great. Don't change a thing.

/home/jitte/.xinitrc
Code:
gkrellm &
urxvt &
xfe &
fluxbox start

What could be more simple? That's all I worry about needing to get to the desktop.
 

mark_j

Aspiring Daemon

Reaction score: 514
Messages: 956

Hello. What do you think about current initialisation system in freebsd? Should it be changed or it's decent?
How about modern faster init system as runit or whatever?
Because of FreeBSD's design, it is "relatively" easy to port another init system to be used instead of the standard rc. (Hopefully it's POSIX etc)
GhostBSD has done it, for example. There are others available in ports, such as runit. Go for it, try it and let us know.
 
D

Deleted member 66267

Guest


Because of FreeBSD's design, it is "relatively" easy to port another init system to be used instead of the standard rc. (Hopefully it's POSIX etc)
GhostBSD has done it, for example. There are others available in ports, such as runit. Go for it, try it and let us know.
I hope there is a port of SysV-init used by Devuan so I could reuse init scripts from Devuan. I tried to use Devuan's init scripts with our RC, it will not work. The syntax is incompatible.
 
D

Deleted member 66267

Guest


Well, that didn't take long for the thing that shall not be mentioned to be mentioned...
So "SystemD" is the forbidden word? Perhaps SirDice's "Why FreeBSD not more like..." is sufficient to answer, I don't need to write too explicit like this.
 

Crivens

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator

Reaction score: 1,514
Messages: 2,429

Google the propper Life Of Brian scene for yourself please ;)

And obnoxious, Linux has bash for such things, we use sh.
 

Zirias

Daemon

Reaction score: 1,180
Messages: 2,129

And [FONT=monospace]obnoxious[/FONT], Linux has bash for such things, we use sh.
But that's not the reason, SysVinit works fine with any POSIX shell as long as the actual init-scripts don't have bashisms. Debian has used dash for /bin/sh for a long time.

But SysVinit IMHO has unnecessary complexity (especially with these run-levels) and still doesn't solve important things like a sane rc framework and things like rcorder(8). LSB init scripts added that somehow…

If you need an init script on FreeBSD, just write one. Chances are it will be very short and readable, if you use the mewburn rc framework correctly.
 

tuaris

Active Member

Reaction score: 22
Messages: 185

It depends on the use case.

I love the current system for it's simplicity, but it does lack in some areas such as parallelism, on-demand start/stop, recovery options, and more complex dependency management. It doesn't make sense to compare rc.d() with systemd, the two solve different problems.

The idea behind systemd (even for all the negativity around it) is actually very good. I think the hate around it was due to the way it was "sold" as an init system, but instead delivered a lot more. It's something completely new that had never existed before (at least in Unix/Linux). I like the concept of a "system layer" that sits between kernel and userland. Such a design works very well for "modern" desktop/laptop platforms. I personally wouldn't mind seeing such a system layer appear in FreeBSD, maybe even something that cooperates with rc.d() instead of replacing it. In a way, devd() is kind of like this.

For servers I wouldn't change a thing, rc.d() works perfectly. Servers already take several minutes to just run through the POST process. An extra delay with booting up the OS and starting all the services in sequence doesn't add much to an already long wait. Additionally, you don't really need all that extra fancy stuff systemd brings running on a server.
 

mark_j

Aspiring Daemon

Reaction score: 514
Messages: 956

It depends on the use case.

I love the current system for it's simplicity, but it does lack in some areas such as parallelism, on-demand start/stop, recovery options, and more complex dependency management. It doesn't make sense to compare rc.d() with systemd, the two solve different problems.

These can all be achieved with ports. Ports allow you to tailor your system beyond the bare basics. Nothing new here. (In fact some parallelism is able to be obtained with rc anyway).


The idea behind systemd (even for all the negativity around it) is actually very good. I think the hate around it was due to the way it was "sold" as an init system, but instead delivered a lot more. It's something completely new that had never existed before (at least in Unix/Linux). I like the concept of a "system layer" that sits between kernel and userland. Such a design works very well for "modern" desktop/laptop platforms. I personally wouldn't mind seeing such a system layer appear in FreeBSD, maybe even something that cooperates with rc.d() instead of replacing it. In a way, devd() is kind of like this.
We've been here before. This is a road well travelled.
Systemd (just the init system) is not required in FreeBSD (or any BSD) because of one BASIC thing. Linux is a KERNEL, not an OS. Everyone takes Linux the kernel and drops some userland on it, let's say GNU, and then throws their preferred other bits into it.
In contradiction to this *BSDs are an entire OS, with a kernel and userland and ports/packages.

systemd is someone's attempt to unify the linux world and turn it into something like *BSDs. I wish them luck, we've been lucky to have that since BSD was invented.

systemd as the gigantic, over-bloated userland replacement is just grotesque, however.
For servers I wouldn't change a thing, rc.d() works perfectly. Servers already take several minutes to just run through the POST process. An extra delay with booting up the OS and starting all the services in sequence doesn't add much to an already long wait. Additionally, you don't really need all that extra fancy stuff systemd brings running on a server.

systemd re-invents the wheel and calls it wheeld...
 

wolffnx

Aspiring Daemon

Reaction score: 213
Messages: 649

why dont adapt your current setup to your needs?
for a desktop system is easy, run the init scripts in parallel for example
the init system wont be changed for shure and for luck for all of us
so..my advice is, start "hacking" your setup
 
D

Deleted member 66267

Guest


decuser

Active Member

Reaction score: 87
Messages: 230

OMG :). Change the init system? I came to FreeBSD because it was a calm oasis of rational thought. The systemd debacle, or kerfuffle, or whatever you wanna call that madness over in Linuxland, was nuts (I heart Linux, too, so don’t flame me). The init system in FreeBSD is super straightforward, has supported every use-case I’ve ever had, and is quite elegant as well. Don’t fix what ain’t broke, puhlease!
 
Top