Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Move to SystemD #94

Closed
deinok opened this issue Aug 13, 2018 · 8 comments
Closed

Move to SystemD #94

deinok opened this issue Aug 13, 2018 · 8 comments

Comments

@deinok
Copy link

deinok commented Aug 13, 2018

Due the fact that the SO of IOT seems to lack some common commands from Linux, I would like to suggest move to SystemD init system.

I know that SystemD have a bit of bad reputation for Linux purists, but this will really help IOT be more near to an expected Linux Board

@jan-kiszka
Copy link
Collaborator

Switching to systemd is imaginable, but we haven't planned for that yet, specifically not for the next version. It would require rewriting some startup scripts and adjusting the iot2000setup tool. And then testing everything. You could support that effort by sending PRs, though.

@deinok
Copy link
Author

deinok commented Aug 14, 2018

Just to ref:

The following local_conf should enable systemd:

DISTRO_FEATURES_append = " systemd"
DISTRO_FEATURES_BACKFILL_CONSIDERED += "sysvinit"
VIRTUAL-RUNTIME_init_manager = "systemd"
VIRTUAL-RUNTIME_initscripts = "systemd-compat-units"

Looks like there are some errors in compilation due init scripts.
Expecting .service and finding InitV scripts

@deinok
Copy link
Author

deinok commented Aug 14, 2018

NVM, @jan-kiszka would you like to open a branch for systemd so I can send PR there?

Also, I think that I could create a ./meta-iot2000-examples/kas-systemd.yml that extends the ./meta-iot2000-examples/kas.yml but with systemd as init. While the transition is not fully tested.

@jan-kiszka
Copy link
Collaborator

@deinok Just fork the project into your own namespace and issue PRs from there. That's a typical workflow pattern.

@deinok
Copy link
Author

deinok commented Aug 16, 2018

Yes, i know the typical workflow, I'd just want to be sure that this kind of heavy changes are going to be accepted (If they work well :) ).

@jan-kiszka
Copy link
Collaborator

If they work, I would be optimistic. The effort is likely as much in testing as it is in finding the places that need changes and applying them.

@deinok
Copy link
Author

deinok commented Aug 16, 2018

@jan-kiszka Most of the required changes are SysV init vs SystemD init mechanisms.
So, supporting both while the transition is done should not be a big problem

@jan-kiszka
Copy link
Collaborator

Unlikely to happen for this layer anymore.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants