Hi,

I written a new init system called "Unitd".
I just released a beta version.
It lacks of bash completion and man page yet but you can already try it.
Whatever contributing will be very appreciated.
For bugs, improvements etc..., just write here.

Cheers

And somehow YOUR system is going to be better than all the others ? In what way ?

looks like a simplified/modified systemd. Yes, how is it better than that?

I for one, IF and only IF the Slackware decides to changes its init system, I will vote for systemd itself. Who needs those pale clones?

After all, every important Linux distribution uses systemd, then its adoption is a huge improved compatibility. And we can kiss goodbye to eudev and elogind, then this will be a great simplification pf system.

Anyway, can OP remember me WHY he posted this on the official Slackware forum?

Looks the Slackers that eager to change their init system?

So, why the heck we did this struggle to adapt elogind to Slackware? And why the heck we did this all fight to keep our beloved SysV init alive with Plasma5 and alike?

As bottom line, I believe honestly that this thread is absolutely off-topic on the official forum of Slackware Linux.

I ask the OP to be kind to ask the mods to move his thread in a more appropriate sub-forum, i.e. General Programming.

3 members found this post helpful.

Mr LuckyCyborg you dont decide anything. You are not a main developer of Slackware, you can have your opinion but your opinion worth the same as any other user. I dont see any votation. Perhaps you can stop saying "we", you make it sound like Slackware depend on you. Keep doing what you are good at, finding bugs in plasma5.
best regards.

9 members found this post helpful.

@tuxuser1: Slackware users will (take the time to) try unitd if they hope to get something that the current init system of Slackware doesn't bring to them. Stating what is this something would help you gain testers.

I thought that the documentation was exhaustive.
My only purpose is inform you that another init system is out there.
I am not interested the rest. The better answer only can obtain trying this system.
Look at the daemons supervision in restart case.
I think that a similar support must be present into a modern init system mostly for server usage.
I never seen a similar thing until now.

You imagine this scenario:
You are a data base administrator for a company which handles mariadb. Please, it is just an example.
Now, you imagine that, for some reasons, mariadb is crashing.
The restart feature, which is common among various init system, will restart it but, at the moment, i don't know an init system which
keeps track all that happen about a process. That means that you will run the service status e you will see that the
process is running but you don't know that it was crashed.
Same thing if a process is signaled, it will restart but you know nothing about that.
Unitd keeps track of all that happen about a process. is it crashed or signaled? Well, if is it exited, what is its exit code ? is it signaled? Well, what is its signal? When is it restarted? When is it stopped? What was its pid before restarting? What was its duration?
Unitd offers that.

The commands name and others has been choice to make familiar its usage to people which are come from from systemd distro.
Maybe, the users will not have afraid to use a different init system and can choice quietly Slackware or another systemd free distro.

I haven't problems with systemd, it's a great software but I disagree with their policy.
I want to learn unix commands. I don't want to use wrappers around them.

The following data are not important but they are here only for give you something since you are asking me.
Some objective data:
With six terminals, dbus, syslogd, NetworkManager and sddm, the system is booting in 2.329 sec.
Shutdown in 3 sec.
I strongly think that I can decrease the time yet by better configuring the units to make the most of parallelization.
Maybe with your help we can improve it.

I will not add anything else to this thread. If you want to support/contribute Unitd only open an issue and together we can fun to change/improve it, whatever you want only if, obviously, your requests are valid!

Best regards

There's been some organized campaign telling users; "don't like systemd - fork it and make it better".

And this here is the typical result of that decade-old campaign:
Yet another repository for systemd project leaders to get their bug reports and bug fixes.

the documentation is useless, especially these links are not related to the tool at all: https://github.com/pandom79/Unitd/bl.../doc/links.txt

Please, ignore that folder. That was useful during the development....
I forgotten to remove it.

I tried reading the code, but the extensive use of typedefs make it next to impossible to look at an individual section of code and understand what it is doing without playing "Hunt the wumpus" through the header files. I couldn't even find where "Array" is defined, and that's used extensively.

Also, the header files could do with reorganising: I'd suggest that including all the system headers indirectly via unitd_types.h is not the best approach.


I wish you well with your project, but the code base is a little inaccessible to outsiders as it stands.

Is this a way to use runit in Slackware?

It's apparently a fork, stripped down and capable of supporting unit files.
And all I can tell you is that most of users here in this forum are not the ideal target audience for this thing.
It's software for people who know nothing of init scripts, and never even tried to write one by hand.

And you've edited your question about what this init can do which bash can't do, but nonetheless:

Usually, the theoretical problem with bash is that it's too extensible to be tightly controlled by the developer.
Where unit files can only function within well defined parameters, bash scripts can do basically anything.
So it's more of a question what can this init do to prevent users from shooting their foot off with bash.
Answer is not much. Even if it's marginally more secure, it does take away a lot of control.

Well, I"m not into coding init systems - just a contented Slackware user - but when I read parts of this discussion, I am reminded of this classic XKCD cartoon that I have used frequently in work discussions:

https://xkcd.com/927/

1 members found this post helpful.

Interesting thread! I'm happy with whatever Mr. Volkerding decides with regard to init systems as Slackware moves forward; I like our development model. I run a systemd distro in a VM and it's okay. I give the edge to Slackware in terms of stability, robustness. For me systemd will hang up once in a while.

2 members found this post helpful.