[Nix-dev] Is systemd a benefit or a liability?

[Nathan Bijnens]

It's not all quiet at other Distro's, some Debian developers are
considering forking Debian if Debian switches to SystemD:
http://debianfork.org/

I like some of the features of SystemD; on the other hand it makes porting
Nix very hard to Non-linux. I would love to have services on Mac, BSD,
Windows in the future.

I think it makes sense to have a abstraction in Nix for defining services
and timers; by default it uses SystemD, but it shouldn't be to hard to have
other implementations (like plain cron, ...). This would make Nix(OS) as
future proof as possible.

Nathan

---
nathan at nathan.gs | nathan.gs
<http://nathan.gs?utm_source=footer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=n> |
@nathan_gs <http://twitter.com/nathan_gs> | linkedin.com/in/nbijnens

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Luca Bruno <lethalman88 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Alexander Zubkov <green at msu.ru> wrote:
>
>> And what you need from the integration of systemd with udev? What
>> use-cases do you have for this?
>>
>>
> Making services or mounts or timers depend upon the appearance or
> disappearance of devices. I use that often to improve boot parallelism.
> Now instead in most systems not fully integrated with systemd you have a
> loop with udev settle waiting for a device to appear in a script. I saw
> that especially in initrd (see nixos stage-1 or dracut without systemd).
>
> _______________________________________________
> nix-dev mailing list
> nix-dev at lists.science.uu.nl
> http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.science.uu.nl/pipermail/nix-dev/attachments/20141019/d96c4389/attachment.html