> May I ask if there is a purpose to this other than doing it as a
> learning experience (if so, then by all means carry on)? Do you see a
> problem with just using current s6-linux-init?
Of course you may ask!
Initially I wanted to learn and understand a proper (init/)shutdown
procedure of UNIX like OS's.
But I figured, that if the scripted procedures turn out elegant and
robust enough,
which - in my opinion - seems to be the case (again everybody please
point out any flaws you find),
I would like to use them over s6-linux-init because
a) The scripts are very easy to port to other UNIX like OS's.
b) I am a big fan of 1 tool 1 job combined in a script.
c) The scripts are easier to understand (and modify) for sysadmins with
little programming background.
I see no problem at all in s6-linux-init, it has worked 100% reliable on
my machine for half a year now.
> Perhaps you already know, but if you are interested in comparing, one
> can still download s6-linux-init-0.4.0.1 from the skarnet.org website
> for studying, which is the last version that used an execline stage1
> init, performed the shutdown procedure in .s6-svscan/finish and
> shipped small C programs that probably did the same thing that
> linux-powertool does here, before the change in package design —which
> also surprised me a the time—. Although s6 dropped in version 2.10.0.0
> the functionality that allowed those to work, and you'd need
> skalibs-2.8.0.1 to be able to actually build and run that version of
> s6-linux-init-maker and s6-{halt,poweroff,reboot}.
Thanks for the heads up!
I did not know about that, that was before I discovered skarnet.
I will definitely look into that.
Regards,
Paul
Received on Sat Jan 11 2025 - 16:29:37 CET