[Info-vax] openvms and xterm

[chrisq]

On 4/22/24 01:11, motk wrote:
> On 22/04/2024 10:03 am, chrisq wrote:
> 
>> One could argue that if you are chasing races in scripts, there's
>> something else wrong in the basic system design :-).
> 
> Sure, but it's not always my job to fix that. Sometimes you have to deal 
> with what you get.
> 
>> Having used Solaris for decades, their svcadm and other service 
>> management tools seemed quite lightweight, in that all the config
>> scripts were in the usual places. Still in plain text format, as were
>> the log files, which could be manually edited with no ill effect. In
>> essence, a layer on top of what was already there. The FreeBSD service
>> framework seems to work in the same way, a lightweight layer on top of
>> what was already there. Limited experience, but the AIX smit etc tools
>> also seem to work the same way, layered software design.
>>
>> Now compare such an approach with that of systemd, and tell us why
>> such opaque complexity is a good thing...
> 
> What? Where is the opaqueness, where is the complexity? I'm absolutely 
> baffled here. What plain text files are you needed to edit? What are the 
> usual places? I use this stuff daily, and it manifestly makes my working 
> life easier. At no point does it replace any of the tradition unix stuff 
> like bind or whatever *unless you specifically ask it to*. None of the 
> major distributions build it that way, except perhaps for people using 
> zfs root, or iot/cloud builds where they *want* a monolithic init.

If you had ever worked on serious system design, you would realise
that reliable system design depends on strict partitioning and
encapsulation. Layered functionality, with defined interfaces.
Strangely  enough, but "elegance" really does apply in many such
cases, and is what many software engineers strive for.

 >
 > It really sounds like you just need to sit down, read the documentation
 > from the systemd and distro side, and work out what works for you.
 > Sitting around carping at what is now an established industry standard
 > because 'elegance' isn't how I choose to spend my time.
 >

No, I don't need to sit down and spend hours reading docs on
something I don't need for my work and that is wrong by design,
though I guess design elegance does depend on personal opinion.

Quite enough camels in the world already...