zlacker

Is this really that hard to type?

https://github.com/openbsd/src/blob/master/etc/rc.d/watchdog...

>>bandra+(OP)
Probably not, but it looks a hell of a lot harder to understand than a unit file.

>>abenga+ps
Huh? Not even remotely

>>bandra+(OP)
> Is this really that hard to type?

Your link is irrelevant. It points to OpenBSD which uses rc, not sysv. The 3 lines of this rc startup script use a file of 400 lines of shell with commands that don't exist in SysVinit.

With sysv, the difficulty depended on the local tools because the launching scripts could not be shared across Linux distributions. Debian used the compiled helper `start-stop-daemon` while Redhat did not.

With sysv, some sysadmin tasks require external tools. Try to write a launching script with a smart autorestart in case of crash. Make it work even when the daemon forks. Do not assume that the daemon writes its initial PID anywhere. IIRC, to get this feature, we had to drop sysv for runit, two decades ago. Now it's just 2 lines in a systemd unit.

>>idoubt+xy
Init and run control aren't the same thing. Which is part of what's nice about sysv (which, yes, OpenBSD's init is based on). OpenBSD's run control system is particularly nice, and it's the sort of thing you can use with an init system that isn't constantly eating everything.

>>bandra+Xw
It's probably straightforward for someone who works with it. For a newb like me, it needs effort to understand. I think unit files are self-documenting and straightforward to understand the first time you see them.