Printable View
Phoronix: Upstart Now Available In Debian Unstable
Steve Langasek of Canonical has pushed their latest Upstart init daemon into Debian unstable. Debian GNU/Linux can now handle either SysVinit, systemd, and Upstart to handle a head-to-head system booting battle...
http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTIzNjk
The interesting bit about Upstart is that Canonical seems to be sticking to it and also -according to LP G+- they want to use it in the user session. :rolleyes:
Canonical should really push for adoption of Upstart in order to get mindshare and make people change to it instead of that systemd. Canonical really is the lesser evil in this case.
They can do that by providing an unbiased explanation how Upstart works and how it can manage system boot tasks better. Having an unbiased set of benchmarks can also help and not to mention that having clear and complete documentation of how to configure Upstart.Quote:
Originally Posted by BO$$
Mucking around with init systems can be tedious and if not done right it can make system unstable or even unbootable
why bother with Upstart when you have systemd? doesn the former has *any* advantage over the latter one?
From Ubuntu's standpoint, they've invested significant time/effort to develop Upstart and it meets their needs, so there's really no reason for them to switch until Debian moves to systemd as the default. I can't think of a good reason for distros still using sysvinit to adopt Upstart instead of systemd (unless Upstart's significantly faster/lighter) if they're looking to get rid of sysvinit.Quote:
Originally Posted by szymon_g
SystemD is Linux-only, and will likely remain like that. I don't think Upstart is.Quote:
Originally Posted by szymon_g
This is a big deal for Debian and Gentoo, who also support non-Linux kernels.
apart from developers of, let say debian with hurd kernel, is anyone even using them?Quote:
Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat
or is it just a toy, just to say "look! we can do it!" that keeps everything else back (same was with udev, xfce 4.10 etc etc)?
... so, instead of stopping using their product, that has no benefits over other one, and start using systemd, they prefer using it? that's retarded.Quote:
Originally Posted by DanL
"it's now possible to do meaningful head-to-head comparisons of boot speed between sysvinit (with startpar), upstart, and systemd. At one time or another people have tested systemd vs. sysvinit when using bash as /bin/sh, and upstart vs. sysvinit, and systemd vs. sysvinit+startpar, and there are plenty of bootcharts floating around showing results of one init system or another on one distro or another, but I'm not aware of anyone having done a real, fair comparison of the three solutions, changing nothing but the init system."
@Michael, looks like a job for... phoronix ;)
and: "Debian GNU/Linux can now handle either SysVinit, systemd, and Upstart to handle a head-to-head system booting battle."Quote:
Originally Posted by tmpdir
Just, please, Phoronix, don't run some benchmarks and Declare a Victor. The extended capabilities of both upstart and systemd versus sysv are far more significant and interesting than any potential improvement in boot times they offer.
In any case, just dropping in a new init system - whether it's pinit, upstart, systemd or anything else - is not likely to result in a very significant performance difference, as most of the overhead during startup is the system doing stuff, and the init system doesn't directly change that. Both upstart and systemd potentially open up methods by which a distro could make boot more efficient, but it's still up to packagers of components that do stuff during startup to implement that, it doesn't magically happen. I doubt Debian will carry native, optimized init functions for all its packages for both systemd and upstart, and without that, a performance comparison is still fairly pointless, even using the same distro as a base.