[NTLUG:Discuss] Startup system types

[terry]

On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 9:10 AM, Chris Cox <cjcox at acm.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 2010-09-06 at 08:35 -0500, terry wrote:
> > Is this a good or accurate way of describing these differences?
> > =============================
> > Debian derivatives use "upstart"
> > RedHat / SuSe derivatives use "system v"
> > Slackware and it's variants use the old BSD-style layout
> > =============================
>

Maybe like this?:
=============================
Debian derivatives use "upstart".
RedHat / SuSe derivatives use "sysV" but are switching to "upstart" as well.
Slackware and it's variants still use the more traditional "runlevel"
system.
=============================


>
> Not sure if I'd call Slackware old BSD, but it's close.
>
> Also, a LOT of this is in flux.
>
> I'm not really sure if striving for faster boot ups should be one of the
> highest priority items (seems it's main focus is on the ability to boast
> and not on trying to solve an actual problem... though there are
> certainly cases where faster bootup is something to be solved).
>
> The problem with trying to "fix" this is that often times the solutions
> are far less flexible...  consider Sun Solaris as an example of what NOT
> to do to "fix" things.
>
> openSUSE uses the sysv style today (and esp true on the enterprise
> side).  Upstart ships with openSUSE 11.3 (as an option to sysvinit) and
> is there for Fedora.  Not saying that upstart will be the "winner" of
> the "must replace sysvinit because" war... but it might be.
>
> So... it MIGHT be that upstart becomes the standard for even RHEL and
> SLES someday... we'll see...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>



-- 
<><