Running a systemd-based Gentoo system

Jack Byer ftn768 at
Wed Sep 8 05:40:50 PDT 2010

Will systemd support the kind of flexibility that Gentoo provides with the
/etc/conf.d structure?

I can change the behavior of any file in /etc/init.d by editing or creating
a corresponding file in /etc/conf.d. Sometimes this configuration can be
quite extensive - modifying command-line parameters that are passed to the
program or allowing giving sysadmins to add or override dependencies without
ever needing to modify any file in /etc/init.d

On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 7:22 AM, Kay Sievers <kay.sievers at> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 07:04, Michael Biebl <mbiebl at> wrote:
> > 2010/9/8 Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri <barbieri at>:
> >>  - calling any of /etc/init.d scripts is bad, as it will call openrc
> >> and it will bring all dependencies on its own, including services
> >> managed by systemd that are up already. This means we better disable
> >> sysv support there (more on this later).
> >
> > Not sure if disabling sysv support is good idea.
> It's definitely the longer-term goal. There are a few missing pieces,
> like native fsck, storage/raid setup, native reboot/shutdown which
> needs to move to native systemd services, without calling into any of
> the old sysv stuff.
> At that point we have a well defined way to bring up a system and can
> offer a way to unify what distros are doing here. It's a bit what we
> did with udev/hotplug over the last couple of years. Almost all
> distros have pretty much exactly the same stuff here, while it was all
> completely different when we started.
> At that point we get all the remaining sysv things out of the boot and
> the basic operations, and we can cripple sysv just to "some additional
> service" that makes sure, all the remaining things which use sysv are
> still started as expectd, but nothing more. We would probably stop to
> allow to randomly mix and have interdependencies between sysv and
> systemd native things.
> Fot the Gentoo case, I don't think there is a sane way to map the
> openrc things into systemd units. And doing it the hard way, leave it
> behind, and move the few missing pieces into systemd might be the
> better approach.
> It would be even funny, if the problems with openrc, and it's
> incompatibility with sysv, would lead to the currently most advanced
> systemd setup. :)
> Kay
> _______________________________________________
> systemd-devel mailing list
> systemd-devel at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the systemd-devel mailing list