zlacker

[return to "Nitro: A tiny but flexible init system and process supervisor"]
1. nine_k+0k[view] [source] 2025-08-22 21:01:36
>>todsac+(OP)
I would like a comparison with runit, which is a very minimal but almost full-fledged init system. I see many similarities: control directories, no declarative dependencies, a similar set of scripts, the same approach to logging. The page mentions runit in passing, and even suggests using the chpst utility from it.

One contrasting feature is parametrized services: several similar processes (like agetty) can be controlled by one service directory; I find it neat.

Another difference is the ability to initiate reboot or shutdown as an action of the same binary (nitroctl).

Also, it's a single binary; runit has several.

◧◩
2. fbarth+QE1[view] [source] 2025-08-23 10:30:09
>>nine_k+0k
There's an appropriately minimal comparison with runit in her slides (PDF) from a talk she gave in 2024: https://leahneukirchen.org/talks/#nitroyetanotherinitsy
◧◩◪
3. cout+UH1[view] [source] 2025-08-23 11:11:51
>>fbarth+QE1
What I got from looking at that comparison is that runit starts a separate supervisor process for each process started. I like the cleaner process tree of nitro, but I wonder what the tradeoffs are for each.
[go to top]