Why runit instead of other alternative inits?

[Member stevesr0]

I noticed that there is a version of antix that is available with runit instead SysVinit.

Being ignorant and curious, I looked up pages about different init programs.

Now, I am confused as well as ignorant and curious.

I would appreciate some comments about why runit was picked as an alternative instead of other alternatives (s6,daemontools, openrc. etc).

thanks.

stevesr0

[Forum Admin Dave]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Not certain I am the one to answer your question. Possibly though with another question. Why not runit?

I do recall all the ones you have listed were played with as well… I am almost certain there is record of this in the forum. Probably some record of other “trial / offshoot” iso files as well.

Computers are like air conditioners. They work fine until you start opening Windows. ~Author Unknown

[Member fatmac]

Helpful

Up

0

::

From memory, (which may not be right).

I believe others were trialled by the devs, & runit was the quickest, so a trial distro was put out to the public.

If it works as well as sysV, but runs quicker, it may well become the standard init for the distro.

Linux (& BSD) since 1999

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Originally the systems init system was created to allow for more parallelism and supposedly a more efficient means of managing process handling. Debian decided to adopt it, but as people investigated this alternative, many people were unhappy about the binary nature of the work, so even though some aspects of it appeared to be encouraging, the reality was that the methods and technology were considered divisive and a move in the wrong direction.

SysVInit was reasonably simple, and it allows text editable configuration (a big deal for many people), but the limited control over parallel process branches was one thing that many were looking for. Systems does provide this at the cost of losing control of the configuration files and fine grain control.

I have to do some research on what runit offers, but I can confirm that it’s fast and nimble. If anyone wants to contribute before I share my own research, you are welcome to do so.

Do understand that the antiX community is one that generally prefers to steer clear of the systemd approach and this is not intended to be a topic to debate about the merits of that alternative.

We’re mostly looking at the new image with runit in this discussion.

--
Brian Masinick

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

Helpful

Up

0

::

https://www.slant.co/topics/4663/~linux-init-systems
compares several init alternatives.

Speed and parallel processes are major advantages.
By the way, systemd really gets RIPPED with a lot of criticisms cited in the reference above; the antiX development team prefers runit and SysVinit.

--
Brian Masinick

[Member stevesr0]

Helpful

Up

0

::

thanks all.

I use antiX partly because I don’t want to use systemd. As a perennial noobie, I was interested in enlightenment about the virtues of different inits.

So far, I have learned that in addition to being the initial and initiating process, an init is also potentially a “services supervisor”. I only have a vague notion of what that means, but it seems a pretty important role all the time a computer is being used, rather than only at boot time.

stevesr0

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

Helpful

Up

0

::

An init process is the first process that has the responsibility for spawning additional processes.

Anything else adds to the original purpose of the init process.

Runit sticks to it’s purpose well.

--
Brian Masinick

[Member AA BB]

Helpful

Up

0

::

masinick: The above comments seem to suggest the antiX dev team is looking to replace SysVInit with runit. True ?

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

Helpful

Up

0

::

AA BB wrote:

masinick: The above comments seem to suggest the antiX dev team is looking to replace SysVInit with runit. True ?

Runit is an alternative to SysVInit.
We have a version of each. I’ve not seen any indication of SysVInit being eliminated. The antiX owner decides what to develop and maintain.

--
Brian Masinick

[Forum Admin anticapitalista]

Helpful

Up

0

::

AA BB wrote:

masinick: The above comments seem to suggest the antiX dev team is looking to replace SysVInit with runit. True ?

False.

Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it.

antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

Helpful

Up

0

::

anticapitalista wrote:

AA BB wrote:

masinick: The above comments seem to suggest the antiX dev team is looking to replace SysVInit with runit. True ?

False.

There’s your answer and it came from the man who is the person who owns antiX and makes decisions.

--
Brian Masinick

[Member AA BB]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Glad to get the ‘official’ word on this because I’ve frequently seen on the forum messages like
‘ antiX with runit – leaner and meaner ‘

[Forum Admin anticapitalista]

Helpful

Up

0

::

AA BB wrote:

Glad to get the ‘official’ word on this because I’ve frequently seen on the forum messages like
‘ antiX with runit – leaner and meaner ‘

That’s my signature. Nobody else has it as far as I am aware.
How does that signature suggest (as you claim) that

the antiX dev team is looking to replace SysVInit with runit

Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it.

antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

[Member AA BB]

Helpful

Up

0

::

‘leaner and meaner’ conveys to me the idea that something is ‘better than’ or ‘preferred’
which led me to suspect, based on Runit posts, that the antiX team may be preparing for an antiX change.
That’s why I asked my original question… to get clarify whether my suspicion was correct.
The team responded with ‘false’, thereby telling me my suspicion was incorrect.

I apologize if my misinterpretation of ‘leaner and meaner’ an/or the Runit posts offended anyone;
I simply wanted to know where antiX was headed and did not want to invest lots of my time learning one antiX version, if the team is preparing to change to another version.

[Member VW]

Helpful

Up

0

::

I just installed Hannie Schaft onto an HP laptop and that sure is mean and lean.

Wow!

“These are the times that try men's souls" - Thomas Paine

[Author]

Posts