From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/1058 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Re: Vision for new platform Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2012 11:27:34 -0400 Message-ID: <20120610152734.GI163@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20120518010620.GW163@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20120609192756.6e72f25e@sibserver.ru> <20120609074426.496a5e13@newbook> <20120609212411.GA163@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <87lijwnmao.fsf@gmail.com> <20120610132246.GF163@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20120610225226.137363d0@sibserver.ru> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1339342336 26921 80.91.229.3 (10 Jun 2012 15:32:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2012 15:32:16 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-1059-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sun Jun 10 17:32:15 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Sdk7Z-0000vp-SK for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 17:32:05 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 13437 invoked by uid 550); 10 Jun 2012 15:32:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 13429 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2012 15:32:05 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:1058 Archived-At: On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 05:17:47PM +0200, Daniel Cegiełka wrote: > I think a lot depends on how we want to use our system. If its user > desktop, a solution such as systemd are very comfortable. If we want Somehow I suspect that running systemd creates a situation where init (and thus the whole system) crashes on low memory. This is not appropriate behavior for ANY system, even if it is a user-facing desktop system. Think too of things like phones; you don't want to be rebooting your phone and unable to receive a phone call because some crappy app is consuming all your memory... > to have a 'critical' system (RTOS/security) then it's better to keep > independent init as simple process. I believe it's a mistake to consider robustness a requirement that only applies to RTOS and similar. With that said, I don't think we need to be in the business of saying "To be system X you must use tools Y and Z!"; instead, we should identify the tools necessary to make a robust and lightweight system, document these choices, and show it in action. There's no reason to preclude somebody who wants to crappify the system from using systemd, dbus, etc. but the tools we select (and any new ones we write) should avoid depending on broken stuff. Rich