initscripts -> systemd | mkinitcpio -> dracut ?

putoelquelee · 2012-08-16 04:43:01

Hello!

mkinitcpio will be replaced with dracut, when systemd become default init system? Or systemd will be integrated into mkinitcpio?

Thanks.

tomegun · 2012-08-16 08:22:53

No one has proposed we add dracut. Personally I don't like dracut and I know Dave (mkinitcpio maintainer) feels the same. Moreover, there is no need to add dracut, nor a need to add systemd to mkinitcpio, though I think the latter is a good idea. If you are interested in helping out with that, join us in arch-projects@archlinux.org.

scjet · 2012-08-16 21:31:37

kinda like a multiple "shotgun" wedding, Arch is goin' RedFart ppl. -so hang on.
(...not that CentOS is that bad really, I mean they do have kickstart/anaconda/python-gui/...) err umm sry, slap me in face plz.
No but seriously, they honestly do have one hell of a parallel "Installer".

No, but seriously, ..., K.I.S.S. me in face again ?

Last edited by scjet (2012-08-16 21:34:54)

ataraxia · 2012-08-16 21:41:56

Tom, I'm curious why you and Dave don't like dracut. It seems quite functional and a bit more simple than mkinitcpio. (Though to be fair, I think that's also because it's a bit less flexible.)

In any case, I'd think that any opportunity to phase out a locally-maintained codebase in favor of using something from upstream would be attractive.

Last edited by ataraxia (2012-08-16 22:20:13)

fsckd · 2012-08-16 22:10:58

scjet wrote:

kinda like a multiple "shotgun" wedding, Arch is goin' RedFart ppl. -so hang on.
(...not that CentOS is that bad really, I mean they do have kickstart/anaconda/python-gui/...) err umm sry, slap me in face plz.
No but seriously, they honestly do have one hell of a parallel "Installer".

No, but seriously, ..., K.I.S.S. me in face again ?

You have been warned for this before before. See you in a week.

Edit: See Respect Other Distributions and Operating Systems, No Trolling, and Personal Topics / Rants.

Allan · 2012-08-17 00:08:11

ataraxia wrote:

a bit more simple than mkinitcpio

I am fairly sure that is not the case...

brain0 · 2012-08-17 09:38:46

I don't think dracut has any advantage over mkinitcpio (or does it?). We love and know mkinitcpio, and as far as I am concerned, we will keep it.

tomegun · 2012-08-17 11:26:25

ataraxia wrote:

Tom, I'm curious why you [...] don't like dracut. It seems quite functional and a bit more simple than mkinitcpio. (Though to be fair, I think that's also because it's a bit less flexible.)

I don't know what you mean by "simple", but my take on it is that the codebase is a lot more complicated, and whatever added functionality they have we could easily add to mkinitcpio if we wanted to. FWIW, I think both got it wrong, and we need at some point systemd in the initrd (and then it won't matter if it is dracut or mkinitpio that creates the initramfs).

In any case, I'd think that any opportunity to phase out a locally-maintained codebase in favor of using something from upstream would be attractive.

In principle, I agree that using something developed externally is better than doing our own thing (not that my opinion matters on this topic, I'm not maintaining mkinitcpio). However, in the case of dracut I just don't think it is on the right track. The code seems overly complicated, littered with hacks and not really providing any more functionality than mkinitcpio.

I think the right analogy is: Exchanging mkinitcpio with dracut would be like exchanging initscripts with OpenRC.

ataraxia · 2012-08-17 13:52:35

tomegun wrote:

ataraxia wrote:
In any case, I'd think that any opportunity to phase out a locally-maintained codebase in favor of using something from upstream would be attractive.
In principle, I agree that using something developed externally is better than doing our own thing (not that my opinion matters on this topic, I'm not maintaining mkinitcpio). However, in the case of dracut I just don't think it is on the right track. The code seems overly complicated, littered with hacks and not really providing any more functionality than mkinitcpio.
I think the right analogy is: Exchanging mkinitcpio with dracut would be like exchanging initscripts with OpenRC.

Indeed, the more I look at dracut, the more ugly things I find that weren't evident to me at first glance - like the hard-coded list of udev rules it considers relevant. (Through to be fair, its maintainers know that's a dirty hack, and have it on their todo list to clean up.)

And I do like your analogy - the need to provide the kind of initrd distros commonly create now feels like an accidental outcome, which could be improved upon at a more basic design level with the tools that are out there now.

Arch Linux

#1 2012-08-16 04:43:01

initscripts -> systemd | mkinitcpio -> dracut ?

#2 2012-08-16 08:22:53

Re: initscripts -> systemd | mkinitcpio -> dracut ?

#3 2012-08-16 21:31:37

Re: initscripts -> systemd | mkinitcpio -> dracut ?

#4 2012-08-16 21:41:56

Re: initscripts -> systemd | mkinitcpio -> dracut ?

#5 2012-08-16 22:10:58

Re: initscripts -> systemd | mkinitcpio -> dracut ?

#6 2012-08-17 00:08:11

Re: initscripts -> systemd | mkinitcpio -> dracut ?

#7 2012-08-17 09:38:46

Re: initscripts -> systemd | mkinitcpio -> dracut ?

#8 2012-08-17 11:26:25

Re: initscripts -> systemd | mkinitcpio -> dracut ?

#9 2012-08-17 13:52:35

Re: initscripts -> systemd | mkinitcpio -> dracut ?

Board footer