* Menachem Moystoviz <email@example.com> wrote:
> As far as I can tell from the systemd blog and people's reactions
> here, the only advantages systemd offers are:
> - Splitting the configuration files, which increases the robustness of
> the configuration files
> - Daemon supervision
> - Bootup speedup by parallelizing the daemons.
> However, from the responses of some people, like Jorge Almeida, I see
> that the benefits of systemd are also given by other programs.
> - It has been suggested in a different thread to implement support for
> rc.conf to source other files - which would allow rc.conf to split
> - As Jorge Almeida suggested, daemontools , perp  and s6  can
> supply daemon supervision *without* changing the init scheme
Also minit by fefe does this, but than we have to put some work into the
/etc/minit script system... which may also break the easy arch way,
which we have now.
> - A patch  has been posted, and possibly added, to NetBSD's
> rcorder, which allows daemons to be started concurrently.
That thing seems to be the right one, for me
> As far as init systems go, it seems to me that while Arch touts using
> a BSD-style init, it's actually hacking around sysvinit to
> provide a BSD-like interface. This seems wrong to me, as BSD already
> provides a robust init framework.
> Why simulate that which you can use?
> In addition, people have cried out against several problems with
> systemd, which include:
> - ini-style configuration vs. shell-style configuration
> - Large, monolithic binary
> It seems to me that in addition to adding support for systemd could
> ease compatibility with other distro's,
> it would be beneficial to add sourcing to rc.conf (or alternatively to
> symlink the new systemd configuration files to files in rc.d).
> However, the only reason to do so is because systemd is widely used -
> i.e. I do not suggest doing this for every init system around.
> In addition, it may be considered to move from systemv to NetBSD's
> init, which stays in-line with the simple interface of rc.conf
> but adds parallelization and modularity.
> Lastly, it may be beneficial to suggest to users to install one of the
> daemon monitors.
> In sum, systemd offers some benefits that are covered by other
> programs and patches, while drawing much controversy and exacting
> a toll which seems a bit too large in the eyes of some users. For this
> reason, while we should add compatibility for systemd, we shouldn't
> force it down the users throats.
Full ACK by me.
Thanks for your two cents, I put my two to them