Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

That it is a Turing complete language and now people can add all sorts of crazy logic

I don’t want to have to evaluate a shell script to figure out how a system service is supposed to start



and how is that any different from system services doing `ExecStartPre=/usr/libexec/my_setup_script.sh`? or worse, 20 different `ExecStartPre` lines that basically build a shell script in the ini file, one line at a time

services are not simply a set of knobs to start a single process, often they don't even have processes (e.g. wg-quick)

and even when they do, it often involves setup, and sometimes cleanup.

systemd has to provide the exact same functionality, even if they put a .ini-paint of coat in it -- the difference is that openrc doesn't make services install N helpers scripts for that. Really, "Not being turing complete" is a useless metric for "stopping complexity in init setups"

the way you stop complexity is by giving pre-configured functionality that is easy to use. systemd did that very well, openrc does do that for a lot of things already, and we're adding more as we see the common need of init scripts for said features




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: