On 2017-01-02 01:00, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 5:19 PM, David Sommerseth
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> On 01/01/17 01:28, jdow wrote:
...
>> I don't mind flame wars of controversial topics, but let it at least
>> start with proper facts ... In my experience, systemd is far better
>> documented than any other init system I've used over the last 15+ years
>> or so.
>
> daemontools was much lighter, much cleaner, and well documented. It
> never took off due to some unfortunate copyright policies by its
> author. It's too late to switch now, because of the integration of
> more modern logging with systemd.

The SYS5 stuff in 6.x and prior lacked flexibility, to be sure. It was simple 
enough that figuring out what was going on became easy. And where the 
documentation failed the workarounds were not all that difficult. But, then,the 
first 'ix I played with was one of the first commercial renditions of SVR4 - on 
the Amiga. So over about 25-ish years I'd learned it. I don't HAVE another 25 
years to learn something with documentation that requires extreme google-fu to 
find. (I did manage to find a page that described /etc/sysconfig contents, 
FINALLY. I've been looking for that off and on for 5 years or more. {^_-} 
Pointers to that list in the documentation for RHEL tuned systemd would be a 
good thing.)

I can see the improvement systemd gives over the old stuff. But, I reserve the 
right to bitch when the learning curve is made artificially steep. (Then I get 
down to business and worry the problems to a solution.)

{^_-}