i don't get people whose response to all the init nonsense discourse as of late is "actually traditional init is nice, see, you can just go and modify these shell scripts"
no it's not
it's inflexibl...
@nprofile1q...
> a supervision system (ideally a dependency-based one) can be far nicer, more flexible, more readable, and actually meeting what most people expect out of a computer these days
i mean openrc is both, dependency based, provides supervision, and makes it so the most common init scripts consist of only about 3 variable definitions and nothing else
but it's also a init script under the hood, so if anyone is so inclined, they can go and modify things, replace the default start() with custom logic, or keep the default start and add extra things on start_pre(), stop_post(), whatever
this duality and flexibility is what made me like it so, enough to step up and take maintainership
imo openrc is very much "doing better" while still being shell, though i do appreciate the different directions other init systems went for a lot too
> a supervision system (ideally a dependency-based one) can be far nicer, more flexible, more readable, and actually meeting what most people expect out of a computer these days
i mean openrc is both, dependency based, provides supervision, and makes it so the most common init scripts consist of only about 3 variable definitions and nothing else
but it's also a init script under the hood, so if anyone is so inclined, they can go and modify things, replace the default start() with custom logic, or keep the default start and add extra things on start_pre(), stop_post(), whatever
this duality and flexibility is what made me like it so, enough to step up and take maintainership
imo openrc is very much "doing better" while still being shell, though i do appreciate the different directions other init systems went for a lot too
1
