Re: [dev] a suckless init system?

From: David Tweed <>
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 16:17:24 +0100

On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Kurt H Maier <> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 02:39:43PM +0100, David Tweed wrote:
>> Well, yes-and-no. The end user (who in the case of many linux desktops
>> and laptops is also the sys admin) may not be aware of how things are
>> structured "under the hood", but they can perceive "laptop X spends a
>> lot of time doing stuff when I turn it on, while laptop Y is usable
>> almost instantly". The only reason I mentioned it (I otherwise try and
>> stay out of "religiously" tinted discussions was that there was
>> discussion about how to do it but no mention of what the important
>> "externally visible" (if you don't like "end-user") goals should be.
> For init systems, speed is a natural consequence of correct design.
> Only an incompetent would have to explicitly list it as a design goal.

Maybe I have no claim to real competence..., but I always tend to find
that if the software design goals aren't pretty concrete listing even
the "obvious" things then either (a) someone else will consider
something I find obvious to be a "why do you want that" or (b) someone
else's obvious is my "why on earth would you want that".

Anyway, here's a comment that I remembered reading the first time round

Note that the point isn't whether fast boot is an important enough
goal to impact in other trade-off's (I think it is, others may think
it's less important than simplicity), as much as that it's something
where it's better to come to an explicit design goal decision.
Received on Thu Aug 16 2012 - 17:17:24 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Thu Aug 16 2012 - 17:24:05 CEST