equivalent of chkconfig
ralf.mardorf at alice-dsl.net
Mon Aug 17 14:46:26 UTC 2015
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 15:56:34 +0200, Oliver Grawert wrote:
>Am Montag, den 17.08.2015, 15:41 +0200 schrieb Ralf Mardorf:
>> Btw. I'm still not used to systemd after using it for around 3 years,
>> but for my workflow a clean systemd at least is easier to handle,
>> than the Wily hybrid.
>> You might get used to the Wily hybrid systemd within 30 seconds, you
>> also might get used to a clean systemd within 30 seconds, but Wily
>> definitively is a mix including init script and wrappers/workarounds
>> and absolutely _not_ a "Full Systemd Experience".
>it is an advertised (and desired) systemd upstream feature to provide
>sysvinit compatibility (like it was in upstart) ... there is nothing
>messy in it, upstream encourages to use this to allow packages that
>need a longer transition period to still work, so debian has it
>enabled (and ubuntu simply inherits it). you can use systemctl on
>these jobs the same way you can use it on native systemd units, so i
>dont get where you see any difference in maintenance.
There's noting wrong with providing the shutdown command, but if
packages install "services" to different locations and as long as there
are wrappers such as "service" it's a mess.
Since you mention upstream, Ubuntu doesn't care much about upstream by
splitting packages. Assumed Ubuntu isn't a hybrid, then why splitting
udev and systemd? They are merged by upstream. For what reason is
a package for upstart still available?
Ubuntu's init process isn't transparent, it's a mess.
As long as systemd and udev are different packages, as long as upstart
is available, as long as the service wrapper is provided, as long as
etc. ... the transition likely will continue for years and systemd is
not going to be transparent.
However, it's off topic and we don't need to discuss it. The OP doesn't
More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss